Posts Tagged ‘Separation of Powers’

Obama To Bypass Congress, Impose ‘Climate Change’ Agenda By Executive Fiat

1013667_10151627948860914_1467283859_n

The radical, Marxist Environmentalist agenda has always been about destroying capitalism and industry.  It has nothing to do with “saving the planet.”   Since the “science” facade of Global Warming is quickly falling apart, their goal is to impose their agenda by force as quickly as possible before the game is up.

Phil Kerpen writes at Fox News:

So much for the denials. An administration that throughout its 2012 election campaign denied it was waging a War on Coal has now come out and publicly declared its intention to shut down coal-fired power plants – putting hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work and sending electricity prices skyrocketing.

This is not what the American people voted for.

[...]  Obama made clear in his speech that he intends to impose regulations on existing coal plants that can only be met through carbon capture and storage (technology that doesn’t exist on a commercial scale), switching to natural gas, or shutting down completely.

Coal still produces 37 percent of U.S. electricity. A Heritage Foundation analysis found that implementing Obama’s proposed regulation on existing coal plants would destroy more than 500,000 jobs, slash the income of a typical family of four more than $1,400 a year, and increase electricity prices at least 20 percent.  Price spikes could be much higher in states that depend heavily on coal-fired power plants, especially in the Midwest.  President Obama once famously explained that he intended to make electricity prices “necessarily skyrocket.”

Read more at Fox News

Of course, Obama’s plan is to go around the constitution’s separation of powers and impose his agenda by executive diktat:

Under pressure from environmentalists, President Barack Obama’s new plan to tackle global warming relies on executive power to corral power plants.

The president calls for the Environmental Protection Agency to “expeditiously” set limits on carbon dioxide emissions for new and existing power plants, a move that will be hailed by environmentalists and decried as debilitating by the struggling coal industry.

“To accomplish these goals, President Obama is issuing a Presidential Memorandum directing the Environmental Protection Agency to work expeditiously to complete carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants,” states the Obama plan.

[...]  Obama’s announcement comes at a time when cracks are starting to show in the science surrounding global warming, as global temperatures stopped rising about 15 years ago.

Read more at the Daily Caller

Obama Announces Plan to Save the Earth from a Problem That Doesn’t Exist

Obama planning to sidestep Congress for next phase in climate change agenda

Obama climate change plan pounds coal stocks

4 Reasons Why the President’s Climate Proposals are Bad for the Economy

OFA’s Leaked Talking Points: Don’t Mention Cost Or Impact Of Obama’s New Climate Change Proposals

Obama: No Keystone Pipeline If It Increases Carbon Emissions

Obama’s Energy Nominee: We Need Carbon Tax To Double Or Triple Energy Costs

Resisting the Green Dragon of Environmentalism

Environmentalism Is the New Religion

UC physics professor: ‘Global warming greatest pseudoscientific fraud’

Former “alarmist” scientist says man-made Global Warming based in false science

Share

Attorney General Eric Holder Investigated For Lying to Congress Under Oath About Targeting Reporters

Holder_G_20130521140140

Eric Holder has a problem:

A law enforcement official has told NBC News that Attorney General Eric Holder is the one who signed the search warrant for the private emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen. The warrant was signed under the guise that Rosen might be a “possible co-consiprator” in violation of the Espionage Act.

Problem is, Holder denied all knowledge – much less involvement – of the DOJ targeting of reporters during sworn testimony before congress.

John Nolte points out:

Last week, and while under oath, Attorney General Eric Holder testified before a House committee that when it comes to “try[ing]  to prosecute the press for the publication of material” he has “never been involved in, heard of” such a thing.

Thursday, however,  we learned that it was Holder who signed off on the application for a warrant to gain access to the private emails and phone records of Fox News reporter James Rosen. In doing so, Holder labeled Rosen a co-conspirator to obtain classified material under the Espionage Act of 1917.

Read more at Breitbart

Congress gave the Attorney General a deadline to clear up the “inconsistencies” in his testimony, but (surprise!), Holder missed it.  He’s practically daring congress to subpoena him, but so far they don’t have the spine:

Republican lawmakers want to haul Attorney General Eric Holder back to the Hill to explain questionable testimony he gave on reporter surveillance — though they are stopping short of issuing a subpoena.

In a letter sent Thursday to the attorney general, Republican leaders of the House Judiciary Committee urged Holder to testify on June 18, or some other date before the end of the month. They say his department’s prior response to date “still fails to fully and adequately answer our questions.”

They want Holder to explain his May 15 testimony.

Read more at Fox News

This guy is so used to getting away with everything, it will take a lot more than “pretty please” to get him to comply.

Holder Personally Authorized Fox News Surveillance

Eric Holder’s Long History Of Lying To Congress

DOJ Responds to Perjury Investigation from Congress: Holder Didn’t Lie

EXPOSED: Obama Justice Dept. Secretly Obtained Reporters’ Phone Records

Share

American Taxpayers Paying For Global Muslim War On Christians

1103-ODU-Iraq-Violence-christians_full_600

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood government that Obama arms, funds and supports is violently persecuting religious minorities, using our tax money to do it:

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood’s governing majority, is not actually crucifying the nation’s Christians. But they are nonetheless actively persecuting Coptic Christians who are said to be one-tenth of the population of the largest Arab country. A photograph of two young men set afire during recent demonstrations is pretty striking.

Demonstrations have turned into riots as Egypt’s police cracked down on the Copts. The Copts were protesting against increasing sectarian violence directed at the country’s Christian minority.

Typically, what has been happening is the Copts protest against Islamist violence directed at them and their churches. St. Mark’s Cathedral has been the target of Muslim extremists in recent week. When the Copts face police, they get tear gassed. And then they are the ones arrested. The Muslim Brotherhood authorities will pick up Coptic youth—hopefully the ones not yet set on fire—and jail them.

Then, the police grab some of the Islamists perpetrators and jail them. Later, following a much-ballyhooed “reconciliation,” the authorities release all—perpetrators and victims alike.

Read more at Townhall

In Syria, the rebels that the U.S. is supporting – who are trying to overthrow Assad – are Islamic extremists who are threatening to exterminate any Christians left behind who don’t convert to Islam:

Syria’s Christians fear an Islamist takeover should the current government be overthrown. During the ongoing civil war there has been a well-documented rise in the number of salafi-jihadist groups operating in Syria that pose a direct threat to Syria’s Christian community. These militant opposition forces espouse an Islamist ideology, which incorporates elements of Wahhabism and Salafism and whose stated goals and objectives are by definition hostile towards Christians. Firsthand accounts from Syrian Christian refugees in Lebanon reported by award winning investigative journalist Nuri Kino detail the horror in which they described kidnappings, rapes, harassment, theft and other violent reprisals at the hands of Islamist groups.

Those who survived reported “just being Christian is enough to be a target,” disproving theories that violence and kidnapping directed towards Syrian Christians is purely incidental or for economic reasons.

Read more at Weasel Zippers

Once again, our taxpayer money is going towards funding Islamic extremism and the suppression of religious liberty.

Islam’s Collective Punishment of Christians

Brutal Sharia Law Now Official Law Of Egypt

Syrian Rebels Attack Christians, Impose Sharia law

Christian Massacres Are Result Of Disastrous U.S. Foreign Policy

Obama Complicit In The Persecution of Christians?

Share

Senate Gun Bills Fail, Obama Rages

ObamaGunPresserAP

Earlier today, 7 anti-gun bills were defeated in the senate (2 more remain to be voted on Thursday).

Never one to take defeat graciously, Obama threw a full-blown tantrum in the bully pulpit, using Gabby Giffords and the Newtown families as political props as he declared the Senate vote “shameful” and slammed 2nd Amendment advocates as “liars.”

Ben Shapiro at Breitbart observes:

With the failure of the Democrats’ attempt to exploit the Newtown school shooting to press forward gun control measures, President Obama took to the microphones along with the relatives of Sandy Hook victims to demonize his opposition. This, of course, was his strategy all along: knowing that he did not have 60 votes in the Democrat-controlled Senate to pass his gun control legislation, he pressed forward anyway, hoping to paint Republicans as intransigent, immoral tools of the gun lobby who don’t care about dead children. After demonizing Republicans, Obama hopes, he can press Americans into voting Democrats back into power in the House of Representatives.

On Wednesday afternoon, Obama played his part to perfection. Mark Barden, father of a first-grader murdered in Newtown, introduced him. Flanking Obama were other Newtown victims; Vice President Joe Biden, face creased in supposed emotional agony, his arm around the mother of a Sandy Hook victim; and former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, who has been one of the lead advocate for gun control on behalf of the administration.

“On behalf of the Sandy Hook parents, I would like to thank President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden,” said Mark Barden, father of a first-grader murdered in Newtown. “We will not be defeated. We are not defeated and we will not be defeated ….. I’d like to end by repeating the words by which the Sandy Hook promise begins: Our hearts are broken. Our spirit is not.”

He then introduced President Obama, who blasted away in a carefully calculated and calibrated assault on gunowners, Republicans, and all those with the temerity to disagree on his gun control proposals. Lashing out with more emotion than he has on any issue of his presidency, Obama played up to the cameras, all the while using gun violence victims as a backdrop.

Obama said that he had acted in response to the shooting of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and Sandy Hook. “Families that had known unspeakable grief,” Obama said, reached out “to protect the lives of all children …. A few minutes ago, a minority in the Senate decided it wasn’t worth it.” Standing on the graves of the children of Sandy Hook has become rote for this president.

[...]   All of this was setup for the coup de grace: a request for more power. Because, after all, Obama was never going to win this debate. He didn’t have the votes, he didn’t have the evidence, and he didn’t have a decent piece of legislation to propose. What he did have was unbridled faux moral indignation and a compliant press.

But he needs more. He needs a majority in the House. And he asked for it. “So all in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington. But this effort is not over,” said Obama. “If this Congress refuses to listen … the real impact is going to have to come from the voters.”

“The memories of these children demand [gun control],” Obama concluded.

What he meant was obvious: the memories of dead children in Sandy Hook demands that voters give Obama more Senators and more Congresspeople. How convenient for him.

Read more at Breitbart

Neither Obama nor the media are interested in hearing from family members of gun violence victims who opposed his gun control scheme, such as this father from Newtown, and the father of 9-year-old Christina Green, who was shot and killed in the Tuscon attack.

They’re only interested in exploiting those grieving families they can use to forward their own political agenda.

Obama Throws Tantrum Over Gun Control Defeat

Obama Just Gave One Of The Angriest Speeches Of His Presidency: ‘I See This As Just Round One’

Obama angrily denounces gun-rights groups as willful liars

Hollywood Mourns Senate Demise of Obama’s Gun Control Legislation

Sen. Feinstein: ‘NRA Money Stops My Gun Bans.’ Reality: ‘Bloomberg Alone Spent Same Amount.’

Opportunist-In-Chief Exploits Dead Children To Push For Liberal Wish List

Obama Campaign Exploits Mass Shooting For Fundraising, Fiscal Cliff Talking Points

Obama Goes After Guns, Ignores Evidence That ‘Gun Control’ Increases Violent Crime

Stats Prove Gun Control Does Not Work

Share

Obama Admin, VA Declaring Veterans ‘Incompetent’ To Own A Gun

Veteran Stands Up For 2nd Amendment At Chicago Anti-Gun Forum

View on YouTube

What a slap in the face to our brave men and women who fought to defend our freedoms, including the 2nd Amendment!

Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D. warns:

How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.

What if that letter also stated: “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”?

That makes is sound like something right from a documentary on a tyrannical dictatorship somewhere in the world. Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me. It is being sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes. In my capacity as Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) I have been contacted by some of these veterans and the stories I am getting are appalling.

The letter provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA. In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent. This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall “… be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…”.

Obviously, the Department of Veterans Affairs can’t be bothered by such impediments as the Constitution, particularly since they are clearly pushing to fulfill one of Obama’s main goals, the disarming of the American people. Janet Napolitano has already warned law enforcement that some of the most dangerous among us are America’s heroes, our veterans, and now according to this letter from the VA they can be prohibited from buying or even possessing a firearm because of a physical or mental disability.

Read more at Red Flag

In another article, he further warns:

Veterans are being declared incompetent not because they have a serious mental illness that makes them a danger to themselves or others, but because they have a physical disability resulting from their service in the armed forces or because they simply let their spouses pay the family bills.

If veterans have minor issues with PTSD, have expressed that they are depressed sometimes, or even in the case of Vietnam veterans admit that they are getting older and sometimes forget to pay their bills on time, the bureaucrats at the VA will seek to declare them incompetent. (I am a 65 year old veteran and often forget where I put my car keys, does that make me incompetent to handle my own financial affairs and even worse mean that I can’t own a firearm?) According to the VA it apparently does.

All of this has resulted in America’s heroes being declared incompetent by a process that blatantly violates their rights to due process under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Then, for reasons that have not been explained these same veterans are also being denied their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

Many of the veterans I have heard from were initially both scared because of what was happening to them, and hurt because it is their own government that is causing this fear. After all, when they joined the military they signed a blank check to their country to defend it and its Constitution even if it cost them their lives. Yet, now their own government is turning on them and taking from them the very Constitutional rights they fought to preserve.

However, now something else is happening; the fear and betrayal that these veterans felt is turning to anger. Their training and instincts as warriors is coming forth and they are once again prepared to fight for their rights and the rights of other Americans. I think that the Obama administration has picked a fight with the wrong dog. Veterans are fighting back.

Read more at Red Flag

Vets rapidly losing 2nd Amendment gun rights

‘I Will Not Be Disarmed,’ Former Marine’s Letter Warns Gun-Grabbing Senator

Obama’s Pandering Flop: Speech To Soldiers Met With Icy Silence

Obama Adds Military Heroes to ‘Enemies List’

Obama Campaign Sues To Restrict Military Voting Rights

Obama Claims US Military Uses Favorite Weapon of Communists, Terrorists

Obama’s Memorial Day Photo-Op Blocks Families, Vets From D.C. Vietnam Memorial Wall For 7 Hours

Share

Obama’s Excuse For Why He Can’t Govern: ‘I’m Not A Dictator’

If you have to say it...

If you have to say it…

Just two weeks ago, Obama tried to explain away his disastrous presidency by saying, ‘The problem is … I’m not the emperor of the United States.”

Poor Obama.  If only he were emperor, he could get so much done.   Now he’s blaming his failures once again on the fact that we have this pesky constitutional republic that won’t allow him to act as a dictator:

“I am not a dictator,” President Obama said Friday while defending his efforts to stop the sequester. “I’m the president.”

Obama said there are limits to what he can do to get a deal on the sequester during a press conference in which he blamed Republicans for standing in the way of a deal.

Read more at The Hill

Obama also hilariously confused Star Wars with Star Trek while lamenting that he didn’t have mind control powers over his opponents:

President Obama yesterday outraged nerds everywhere when he committed sci-fi heresy by mixing up “Star Wars” and “Star Trek” in remarks about budget cuts.

Speaking at a White House press conference, Obama joked that he couldn’t use a “Jedi mind meld” to get Republicans to agree to his budget plan.

“I know that this has been some of the conventional wisdom that’s been floating around Washington, that somehow, even though most people agree that I’m being reasonable . . . the fact that [Republicans] don’t take it means that I should somehow do a Jedi mind meld with these folks and convince them to do what’s right,” the president said.

Obama — a professed Trekkie — was conflating the “Jedi mind tricks” of “Star Wars” with the “Vulcan mind meld” of “Star Trek” lore.

The blunder set off a frenzy of ridicule across the Twitterverse.

Read more at the New York Post

The Jawa Report snarks:

President Obama wished he could alternatively do a Jedi Death Grip on Conservatives, but that power was also not his to use. He concluded the press conference saying, “May the force be with you so you can live long and prosper.”

I leave the internets for just a couple hours and Obama declares he’s not a dictator (Update: Media hoping for a dictator)

Obama’s “Ministry of Truth” tries to turn his gaffe into a cool meme for the interwebs

Obama Finds Idea of Dictatorial Powers ‘Very Tempting’

Sequestrageddon: Democrats Hype Up Hysteria Over Budget Cuts

Lucasfilm Runs Defense for Obama’s ‘Jedi Mind Meld’ Flub

Share

Obama Uses Sequester As Excuse To Release Hundreds Of Criminal Illegal Aliens

Judge Napolitano: ‘Almost An Impeachable Offense’ If Obama’s Making Spending Decisions ‘To Hurt Us’

View on YouTube

Abdicating his constitutional responsibility to uphold the law and defend our nation against an invasion of illegal immigrants and criminals is grounds for impeachment, if not a charge of treason.

Arnold Ahlert writes at Front Page Mag:

In one of the most politically despicable moves ever perpetrated by a sitting administration, federal immigration officials have released hundreds of illegal aliens from prison in anticipation of budget cuts produced by the sequester. “As fiscal uncertainty remains over the continuing resolution and possible sequestration, ICE has reviewed its detained population to ensure detention levels stay within ICE’s current budget,” said agency spokeswoman Gillian M. Christensen in a statement. Immigration officials further warned that even more releases are possible, if the anticipated cuts are realized.

In Arizona, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu, who revealed that more than 500 inmates were released in his county alone, put this ploy in the proper perspective. “President Obama would never release 500 criminal illegals to the streets of his hometown, yet he has no problem with releasing them in Arizona. The safety of the public is threatened and the rule of law discarded as a political tactic in this sequester battle,” he said.

[...]  In a coordinated scare tactic, DHS Secretary Janet A. Napolitano on Monday warned that, if the sequester occurs, as many as 5000 border agents will also be furloughed, increasing the chances that even more, and possibly more dangerous, illegal aliens will be roaming the countryside. “I don’t think we can maintain the same level of security,” Ms. Napolitano contended.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) cut right through the manufactured hysteria. In a letter sent to Ms. Napolitano, he outlined a host of alternative cuts Ms. Napolitano could make. Yet the most telling part of that letter was the revelation that DHS will have approximately $9 billion in unspent funds by the end of FY2013, “raising the question of why we would not start reclaiming these funds,” Coburn wrote.

[...]  Once again, the President of the United States has made it clear that he and his administration are prepared to implement their agenda by any means necessary. In this case, Obama, along with DHS and ICE officials, have now demonstrated that they are more than willing to potentially endanger American lives, rather than accept a “cut” that merely reduces the overall increase in government spending. The president undoubtedly sees such tactics as “negotiation.” Extortion is more like it.

Read more at Front Page Mag

Bryan Preston observes:

The president is also threatening to drop our border guard. In a rational age, these acts would be impeachable. Not too many years ago Californians recalled a governor for offering drivers licences to illegal aliens, and here we have a president flagrantly violating his oath to defend the nation.

Obama’s first sequester move: Releasing “waves” of illegal immigrants from detention centers

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer Rips Obama For Releasing Illegal Immigrants Ahead Of Sequester Cuts, “The Height Of Absurdity”

Republicans Promote Amnesty While Dems Refuse To Secure Border, Recruit Illegal Immigrants Onto Welfare

Obama: No Border Security Before Path To Citizenship

Obama Quietly Grants Amnesty To Thousands Of Illegal Aliens

Share

Senate Republicans Introduce Bill To Cede ‘Power Of The Purse’ To Obama

McConnellObama

What on earth is WRONG with these people?!  Don’t they know what happens when a legislative body cedes power to the executive?   Haven’t they ever read a history book?   Haven’t they read the constitution?

Michael Tennant warns at the New American:

With budget sequestration looming and no deal to avert it in sight, Senate Republicans, eager to avoid blame for any cuts, have devised a strategy that is as unconstitutional as it is ill-advised: Let the president decide what to cut.

According to Politico, Senators Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), with “the tacit support of Senate GOP leaders,” have been circulating a draft bill that would suspend the $85 billion in spending cuts required by the sequester. Instead, it would give President Barack Obama until March 8 to come up with an alternative that achieves the same level of savings in the same proportions: Fifty percent from domestic discretionary spending and 50 percent from defense spending. Once Obama laid out his plan, Congress could either allow the plan to become law or pass a resolution of disapproval, by simple majority vote of both houses, by March 22.

Congressional disapproval would not, however, be the end of the story. The president could sign the resolution, thereby deep-sixing his own plan in favor of the sequestration. On the other hand, he could veto the resolution, and then the usual two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress would be required to override his veto, restoring the sequestration.

The plan, which Politico aptly describes as an “elaborate, almost Rube Goldberg construct,” is supported by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who said, “The goal isn’t to hand over congressional authority. It’s to make sure these cuts actually happen.”

Of course, if McConnell really wants to ensure that the cuts take place, there is a much simpler way of going about it. All Republicans have to do is not offer a plan of their own and then filibuster any bills the Democrats advance. Voila! The sequester takes effect.

Clearly, then, there is more to this move than simply ensuring that budget cuts occur. If Congress does nothing, or if it puts forth its own plan to avoid sequestration, Congress will get the blame for whatever cuts take place. But if the president is given carte blanche to decide what will be cut, he will become the scapegoat.

“It’s a game,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told MSNBC’s Jansing & Co. “The president himself becomes the bad guy; he owns the sequestration. He’s the guy who’s blamed for cutting defense or Head Start.”

Read more at the New American

It’s an incredibly dangerous game to play.  Obama will find a way to blame it on Republicans no matter what, and the media will help him.  But once granted more powers, he will NEVER give it back.

Sacrificing what few powers the legislative branch has to hold this out-of-control president in check is NOT a solution!

Republicans Want to Give Obama More Power? Why Do We Lose Elections?

Sequestrageddon: Democrats Hype Up Hysteria Over Budget Cuts

Senate Democrats Offer Obama Unlimited Borrowing Power In Violation Of Constitution

Share

Leaked: Obama’s Rules For Assassinating American Citizens

02E1C92E-E3E6-4CDE-8620-F3FB73E30FBB

Who’s next?

Michael Isikoff reports at NBC News:

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” — even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the  September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.

Read more at NBC News

Obama behaves more like a monarch with each passing day Americans allow him to get away with it.

5 Disturbing Aspects of the DOJ White Paper on the President’s License to Kill

Jay Carney: Drone strikes constitutional, ethical, wise, and completely within the province of a Nobel Peace Prize winner

Where Is The Outrage Over the Domestic Use of Drones?

Obama’s ‘kill list’ is unchecked presidential power

In constitutional republics, presidents don’t have ‘kill lists’

Obama Personally Overseeing Terrorist ‘Kill List,’ Deciding Who Lives And Dies

Krauthammer: Obama Denounced Enhanced Interrogation; Now He’s Judge, Jury And Executioner

Obama’s kill list – All males near drone strike sites are terrorists

Share

Attorney General Claims Obama Decides Who’s ‘Entitled’ to Second Amendment Rights

obama-demands-new-proposals-for-gun-control

Earth to Holder: the 2nd Amendment right to armed self-defense comes from GOD, NOT from the Executive Branch or any other government office. The Constitution acknowledges and preserves this right, and no president has the power to pick and choose who can exercise it.

Tim Brown writes at the Freedom Outpost:

Attorney General Eric Holder discussed gun violence at Clark Atlanta University in Georgia on Thursday and called last week’s shootings at Price Middle School and Morehouse College both shocking and outrageous and said that they were reminders a pervasive epidemic of gun violence. While Holder attempted to say the administration was attempting to strike a balance between advocating for tougher gun regulations while preserving the gun rights of citizens, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, he went on to state quite clearly that Barack Obama has asked him to “expand” the criteria of the “wrong people” getting their hands on guns.

[...]   Holder went on to take questions from the audience and this is where his comments pointed to the Obama administration determining exactly who the expansion of the categories that would deny Second Amendment rights to entered the discussion.

Holder didn’t say who this might apply to specifically. He did, however, state, “A person who has a gun should be a person who is entitled to have one.”

Holder went on to say, “We have Second Amendment rights and there is nothing in what the President is trying to do that will affect those Second Amendment rights, but there’s certain people; people who have mental health issues perhaps… people who have felony records. These are all categories of people who are not entitled to carry a gun and I think that we have to make sure that that continues to be the case.”

Never mind that Holder’s own DOJ and ATF put nearly 2,500 firearms in the hands of criminal drug cartels in Mexico.

“One of the things the President has asked me to do is to look at that list, to look at those categories and see if we need to expand it to make sure that, again, the wrong people do not come into possession of guns,” Holder added.

Friends, the argument over violent felons is valid only if the law will not mete out just punishment. There was no argument over whether a person’s rights were being violated when someone was found guilty of murder, rape, kidnapping or various other crimes that warranted the death penalty. Now we don’t want to execute people for such crimes, so they “pay their debt to society,” which is not even close to justice, and then we let them back on the streets, but remove their Second Amendment rights; rights that are claimed to be unalienable and given by God. Personally, I’d rather see justice served and not argue about who is and is not entitled to what we have been told are God given rights that the government cannot take away.

Additionally, those who were determined to be mentally ill, not by the Federal government though, were relagated to institutions, but we don’t do that now because we don’t want to hurt someone’s feelings.

However, what should concern every American is just who this “expansion” of categories of those that the Obama administration deems to not be “entitled” to arms applies to. Will it be those with a particular political persuasion? ideology? theology? What will determine this and how will they attempt to enforce it?

Personally, it seems clear that any and all attempts by those in Washington at what is commonly referred to as “gun control” are nothing more than Federal infringements upon the Second Amendment and thus unlawful and unconstitutional.

Read more at Freedom Outpost

Joe Biden: Government Can Determine What Types Of Weapons Americans Can Own

Ever Felt Anxious Or Depressed? New Proposals Could Take Away Your Gun Rights

Justice Dept. Admits Obama’s Gun Control Plan Would Require Universal Registration, Confiscation

Democrat Congressman: ‘The State Ought to Have a Monopoly on Legitimate Violence’

Obama Promises To Abuse Executive Powers To Assault 2nd Amendment Rights

Obama’s Gun Plan: Arm Drug Cartels And Terrorists, Disarm Americans?

Share

Bloomberg’s Armed Guards Hassle Reporter For Challenging Him On Gun Control: ‘Why Can YOU Defend Yourself But Not The Majority of Americans?’

Hypocrisy in liberal standards between the ruling class and the “little people”?  Say it ain’t so!

Reporter Jason Mattera got a first-hand look at the double standard when he challenged gun-grabbing New York Mayor Bloomberg to disarm his security in consistency with his anti-gun rhetoric:


View on YouTube

Wynton Hall reports at Breitbart:

In the video, Bloomberg is seen surrounded by security. Mattera approaches Bloomberg and asks, “In the spirit of gun control, will you disarm your entire security team?”

Bloomberg’s reply:  “Uh, you, we’ll get right back to you.”

“Why can you defend yourself but not the majority of Americans?” Mattera asks as the mayor walks away. “Look at the team of security you’ve got.  And you’re an advocate for gun control?”

Read more at Breitbart

Of course, as Charles Hurt explains at the Washington Times, “Gun-free zones are only for the ‘little people‘”:

There is a good lesson here these days with so many politicians making political hay out of 20 young children and six educators gunned down in an elementary school last month. They want to use that horror to advance their own political agenda of disarming law-abiding citizens.

But it is important to remember that while they are talking about disarming you and me, they are not talking about disarming themselves. They will still be coddled in their fortresses. The closer you get to the Capitol, the more armed guards there are. Up close, there are bombproof guard shacks, literally, on every street corner. Squads of machine-gun carrying guards dot the magnificent marble buildingscape at all times.

Leaders in Congress ride around with escorts of huge armed men. Is that because what they do every day is more dangerous than what you and I do every day? Is that because their safety is more important than our safety? Or is it because they have figured out a way for suckers like you and me to pay for their security and so they don’t much care anymore about ours?

Read more at the Washington Times

White House Petition Calls For Secret Service To Be Replaced By “Gun-Free Zone” Signs

Innocent Americans Defend Themselves With Guns: The Stories You’re Never Told

Surprise! Feinstein’s ‘Assualt Weapons’ Ban Grabs Handguns, Shotguns

‘Largest Act of Civil Disobedience in State History’: New York Gun Owners Refuse To Register

Share

Obama’s Frightening New Effort to Demonize the GOP

d34589a3fc4da5ac48e947d7298a328d

Learn the lessons of history. This is how third-world dictators marginalize their opponents before grabbing the tyrannical powers necessary to dispose of them.

From Keith Koffler, blogger at White House Dossier:

One of the most remarkable and frightening aspects of President Barack Obama’s inaugural address was his dismissal of his opposition – presumably the House Republican caucus – as “absolutists” who are without “principle.”

They are mucking up Obama’s agenda, and he won’t have it.

[...]  Absolutism, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is a form of despotism – “government by an absolute ruler or authority.” That the president of the United States is accusing his democratically-elected opponents of acting in a tyrannical fashion is a remarkable development with potentially profound implications.

Once the president’s opponents have been defined in the American mind as despotically inclined, unsusceptible to reason, and unwilling to play by the normal rules of politics, it is only natural that extreme measures are permitted in response.

This White House has already shown a propensity toward ruling by executive fiat – whether by executive action that effectively enacts rejected legislation, by refusing to enforce existing law, or by crafting rules for legislation to grant vast new powers to bureaucrats.

Once it has de-legitimized the opposition, the White House can claim it is left with no choice but to accelerate and expand its use of executive power. What else can they do, the president and his operatives will argue, when faced with the insanity of the Republicans?

The press, which avidly buys into the notion that much of the House Republican caucus is beyond reason, will lend a sympathetic ear to Obama as he struggles with the forces of darkness.

Read more at Politico

In press conference, Obama demonizes Republicans as uncaring

Krauthammer: Obama Trying To Destroy GOP, Not Fix Economy

Limbaugh: Republicans are Scared to Death of Obama Because He Wins by Demonizing Opponents

Mark Levin’s Inaugural Day Message— Fight!

Divider-in-Chief Seeks to Split Republican Party Into Warring Factions Before 2014 Midterm Election

Community-Organizer-In-Chief To Reboots 2012 Campaign Machine As Political Activist Group Devoted To…Himself

Obama’s REAL Target is the Constitution

Obama’s Second Inaugural Address Declares War on Liberty

Americans Can No Longer Afford Détente With The Socialist Left

Share

Republicans Promote Amnesty While Dems Refuse To Secure Border, Recruit Illegal Immigrants Onto Welfare

27293_479172622140009_1093700087_n

If you haven’t already, it’s time to read up on the Cloward-Piven Strategy to collapse the system with unsustainable demands.  This is one of the ways it’s being implemented.

Michelle Malkin writes:

Hey, did someone set the clock back six years in Washington? Because today looks a hell of a lot like the dawn of the Bush-Kennedy-McCain 2007 illegal alien amnestyDeja vu all over again.

Starring in the role of John McCain this time around? Florida GOP Sen. Marco Rubio. Standing in for George W. Bush? Barack H. Obama. The usual liberal Democrat and bend-over Republican suspects serving as the supporting cast? Majority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, illegal alien intern employer Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and freshman Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake.

Here’s the gist of the new Gang-rene of Eight’s plan:

According to a five-page document provided to POLITICO, the sweeping proposal — agreed to in principle by eight senators — would seek to overhaul the legal immigration system as well as create a pathway to citizenship for the nation’s roughly 11 million illegal immigrants. But establishing that pathway would depend on whether the U.S. first implements stricter border enforcement measures and new rules ensuring immigrants have left the country in compliance with their visas. Young people brought to the country as children illegally and seasonal agriculture industry workers would be given a faster path to citizenship.

[...]  Question: If GOP senators were serious about cracking down on the systemic, dangerous, ongoing, persistent problem of illegal alien visa overstayers and the failure to enact an effective visa tracking system since before and well after 9/11 (read THIS), why haven’t they pushed for fixing it SEPARATE AND APART from amnesty measures?

Answer: Because these cynical panderers are not serious about ending the backlog of more than 750,000 unvetted visa overstay records.

And another government “commission” to “ensure the new enforcement mechanisms take effect?” Spare us another phony, dog-and-pony Blue Ribbon Panel to Nowhere. Please.

Rubio is winning praise from some of my conservative friends for noting that we’ve been living under de facto amnesty.

Um, DUUUUUH.

The solution to the problem isn’t to throw in the towel and tie enforcement-in-name-only to a de jure amnesty.

It’s to turn back Obama’s systemic undermining of our existing immigration laws on their own merits.

Read more at Michelle Malkin

 

Michelle Malkin further observes that these illegal immigrants are already being recruited into government dependency, which will make them likely Democrat voters:

Among the many self-deluded promises that GOP illegal alien amnesty promoters are making, this one is especially snort-worthy:

Those who have obtained probationary legal status would not be allowed to access federal benefits.

Oh, yeah? How, pray tell, do these capitulationist Republicans propose to ensure that shamnesty beneficiares don’t get access to federal benefits later when they can’t do anything to prevent the Obama administration from sabotaging existing federal prohibitions on welfare for immigrants now?

Remember: Back in August, several GOP senators wrote DHS Secretary Napolitano and Secretary of State Clinton requesting answers to questions related to the departments’ apparent waiving of the legal requirement that immigrants not be a ‘public charge’ (i.e. likely to be welfare-reliant).

Reminder: Obama’s USDA is actively recruiting Mexicans for food-stamp enrollment in direct violation of federal immigration statutes.

Read more at Michelle Malkin

This deal is so beneficial to the Left that Democrats actually begged Obama to stay out of it and not mess it up, but he just can’t help himself.  He is demanding amnesty WITHOUT securing the border (can you say “border rush?”):

Obama offered his own principles on immigration in Las Vegas on Tuesday. He pushed for a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants that is faster than the one the Senate group proposed.

Rather than emphasize border security first as the senators want, he would let undocumented immigrants go ahead and get on a path to citizenship, if they first undergo national security and criminal background checks, pay penalties, learn English and get behind those foreigners seeking to immigrate legally.

Even more arrogantly, he is proposing his own legislation, even though the president’s job is to ENFORCE the law (which he refuses to do), not WRITE the law:

“I’m hopeful that this can get done, and I don’t think that it should take many, many months. I think this is something we should be able to get done certainly this year and I’d like to see if we could get it done sooner, in the first half of the year if possible,” Obama told Telemundo.

If Congress delays, he said, “I’ve got a bill drafted, we’ve got language” ready to offer Capitol Hill.

Read more at Newsmax

Republicans are caving and offering him 90% of what he wants, and it’s STILL not enough.   Just wait until all those immigrants are added to the Obamacare rolls.   Talk about hitting the gas on the road to bankruptcy!

10 facts Conservatives Must Know On Immigration Reform

Obama: No Border Security Before Path To Citizenship 

Amnesty Now; Enforcement Never

Amnesty plus Obamacare = fiscal nightmare

Cost of giving illegal immigrants path to citizenship could outweigh fiscal benefits

Immigration: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

Stunner. Obama White House Takes Credit for Immigration Deal

Rubio: We’re not having an immigration bidding war

Audio: Rush Limbaugh and Marco Rubio on immigration reform

The $2 million ‘immigration reform’ speech: Obama flying from DC to Las Vegas for address at a high school, then flying back to DC

Share

Court Declares Obama’s ‘Recess’ NLRB Appointees Unconstitutional, Obama Admin. Ignores Ruling

dictator

Last year, Obama appointed three radical union hacks to the National Labor Relations Board to push a pro-union (and pro-Democrat) agenda.   Knowing that they would never pass muster with the Senate, Obama declared that the Senate was in “recess” – when it clearly was not – and appointed them anyway, bypassing the constitutionally required vetting process.

Thanks to Mark Levin, a lower D.C. court has now recognized the unilateral appointments as blatant violations of the constitution and separation of powers:

Four days after President Obama pledged to “protect and defend the Constitution,” the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that he violated that oath in making several appointments last year.

The court said Obama’s three “recess” appointments to the National Labor Relations Board weren’t recess appointments at all, since the Senate was still in session when he made them.

Assuming the Supreme Court upholds the panel’s ruling, all the decisions the board made over the past year will be nullified, since without those three there weren’t enough members on the board to make any rulings at all.

[...]  Thankfully, there are still some judges around who see the virtue of protecting and defending our “messy” system, even if Obama and his sycophants don’t.

Read more at Investors Business Daily

Stephen Dinan observes at The Washington Times:

But the ruling has even broader constitutional significance, with the judges arguing that the president’s recess appointment powers don’t apply to “intra-session” appointments — those made when Congress has left town for a few days or weeks. They said Mr. Obama erred when he said he could claim the power to determine when he could make appointments.

“Allowing the president to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution’s separation of powers,” the judges said in their opinion.

The judges said presidents’ recess powers only apply after Congress has adjourned a session permanently, which in modern times usually means only at the end of a year. If the ruling withstands Supreme Court scrutiny, it would dramatically constrain presidents in the future.

And the court ruled that the only vacancies that the president can use his powers on are ones that arise when the Senate is in one of those end-of-session breaks. That would all but eliminate the list of positions the president could fill with his recess powers.

Read more at the Washington Times

Still, the appointees refuse to step down, and the NLRB appointees are continuing to push forward their agenda as if the ruling never happened:

Mark Gaston Pearce, chairman of the National Labor Relations Board…indicated that the NLRB will attempt to continue on regardless:

The Board respectfully disagrees with today’s decision and believes that the President’s position in the matter will ultimately be upheld. It should be noted that this order applies to only one specific case, Noel Canning, and that similar questions have been raised in more than a dozen cases pending in other courts of appeals.

In the meantime, the Board has important work to do. The parties who come to us seek and expect careful consideration and resolution of their cases, and for that reason, we will continue to perform our statutory duties and issue decisions.

Pearce, in short, is indicating that the NLRB’s strategy is to act as if the court’s ruling that the appointments were unconstitutional somehow only applies only to the particular case that went before the Appeals Court and hope that the White House can get the Supreme Court to quickly review the case.

Read more at the Washington Examiner

Constitution? What constitution? Who needs a constitution or the rule of law, anyway?

Daniel Greenfield remarks at FrontPageMag:

The NLRB does not get to disagree with a Federal Appeals Court. It has already overstepped its jurisdiction infinite number of times. Its opinion of an Appeal Court ruling is completely irrelevant. It does not get to narrowly define the meaning of that ruling. It does not get to stay in business and declare that it will go on doing exactly what it was doing before because it is confident that the Supreme Court will rule in its favor.

But in ObamaTime that is exactly how it works. Powers are seized and the propaganda press starts screaming that this is the way it should be. Obama unilaterally declares the Senate in recess and appoints union lawyers to the NLRB. The NLRB ignores an Appeals Court ruling and declares it will go on functioning.

The rule of Obama is in direct conflict with the rule of law.

Read more at FrontPageMag

White House: Court’s recess appointment ruling has ‘no impact’ on NLRB operations

Obama’s Abuse of Power

White House Calls NLRB Ruling ‘Unprecedented’

Court to Obama: What Part of ‘The’ Do You Not Understand?

U.S. Chamber Cheers Court Decision On Obama Appointments: ‘Confirmed Our Concerns’

Obama Defies Constitution To Make ‘Recess Appointment’ While Senate Is In Session

Obama’s ‘Recess’ Appointments Circumvent Background Checks to Hide Radical Union Agenda

Share

‘Largest Act of Civil Disobedience in State History’: New York Gun Owners Refuse To Register

Molon_Labe_Come_and_Take_Them_sticker

Good for them!   This is where we have to draw the line.  If New York gets away with it, states across the country will soon follow.

Alex Newman writes at the New American:

After Democrats in New York rammed a sweeping assault on the right to keep and bear arms through the legislature that failed to exempt police officers from the draconian restrictions, gun owners and even some lawmakers are planning what has been dubbedpotentially the largest act of civil disobedience in state history. According to news reports, gun rights activists are urging everyone to defy far-left Governor Andrew Cuomo’s new registration mandate while daring authorities to “come and take it.”

Analysts say the legislation, passed in a frenzy last week in the wake of the Newtown shooting, represents the most brazen infringement on the right to keep and bear arms anywhere in the nation. Among other points, the so-called SAFE Act seeks to limit magazines to just seven bullets, require virtually all of the estimated one million semi-automatic rifles in the state to be registered with authorities, mandate reporting of patients who express indications that they may have thoughts about hurting themselves or others by doctors, and more.

Aside from being unconstitutional, experts on gun violence also point out that the draconian schemes are a bad idea: Studies have repeatedly shown that more guns lead to less crime, and the phenomenon is obvious across America — just compare Chicago or D.C. to Alaska or Wyoming. The mandated reporting requirements for doctors, meanwhile, have come under fire from across the political spectrum. Whether it will even be possible to enforce the bill, however, remains to be seen.

Preparations are already being made for mass resistance. “I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said President Brian Olesen with American Shooters Supply, among the biggest gun dealers in the state, in an interview with the New York Post.

Even government officials admit that forcing New Yorkers to register their guns will be a tough sell, and they are apparently aware that massive non-compliance will be the order of the day. “Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that,’’ a source in the Cuomo administration told the Post, adding that officials expect “widespread violations” of the new statute.

Threats of imprisoning gun owners for up to a year and confiscating their weapons are already being issued by governor’s office, headed by a rabid anti-Second Amendment extremist who suggested before the bill passed that “confiscation” of all semi-automatic rifles was being considered. If tens or even hundreds of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens refuse to comply, however, analysts say New York would either have to start raising taxes and building a lot more prisons, or give up on the scheme that experts say will do nothing to reduce violence and that lawmakers say is aimed at eventual confiscation.

Activists involved in the state-wide boycott against the unconstitutional statute who spoke to the Post almost taunted authorities, saying gun owners would essentially dare authorities to “come and take it away.” According to the paper, leaders of some of the state’s hundreds of gun clubs, dealers, and non-profit organizations, citing the New York Constitution’s guarantee that gun rights “cannot be infringed,” are currently involved in organizing the resistance. Among the primary concerns is that, with registration, authorities would know where to go for confiscation, an idea already proposed openly by Governor Cuomo himself.

Read more at the New American

Sheriffs raise concerns about N.Y.’s new gun law

Outrage Grows Over Gov. Cuomo’s NY Gun Laws

Hit us with your best shot, Andy!

‘I Will Not Be Disarmed,’ Former Marine’s Letter Warns Gun-Grabbing Senator

The Second War of Independence has been declared

Obama Playing Chicken With American Lives

Share
Become A Subscriber!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Follow ConservThoughts on Twitter

Support This Blog!

This blog is a labor of love for you, the reader who loves this country and wants to stay informed of the threats to our liberty and how to make a difference. I receive no compensation for blogging and pay for web services out of our family budget. Would you consider making a small donation to help? Just like the fight for liberty, every little bit makes a difference!

Categories
Archives
Note: Please keep your comments respectful and relevant to the topic at hand. I will not approve ad hominem attacks or profanity. Nor will I approve comments by advertisers using their business or product and hyperlink as their username. This blog is not a forum for free advertising.
Free Gift!
FREE Pocket Copy of the Declaration & Constitution!
PJTV
Change A Child’s Life!

Get stickers, T-Shirts and more at the Patriot Depot!

Preparedness Pantry Blog

Copyright Trolls Sue Thoughts From A Conservative Mom

Join The Fight!
You Are Visitor
Powered by web analytics software.
Learn more about us debt.
DiscoverTheNetworks.org
Help A Friend In Need!
A non-profit organization facilitating generosity between people.
Financial Freedom
Get on the road to financial peace with Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University!

Journey to true financial freedom with Crown Financial Ministries!