Witnessing a Failed Presidency – Tea Party Nation

Witnessing a Failed Presidency – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan Caruba

 

When we elect someone—anyone—to the office of President, it is only natural that we attribute great political skills, intellect, and judgment to that man. We want to believe we have selected someone with the ability to do what must be done in a dangerous and very complex world.

 

This may explain why Presidents who have presided in times of war are more highly regarded than those that have not. Washington brought the nation into being by patiently pursuing a war with Great Britain, Lincoln saw the Civil War to a successful conclusion, preserving the Union

The last century offered two world wars and several lesser ones, Korea and Vietnam. Voters put Franklin D. Roosevelt in office in 1933 and then kept him there until his death in 1945 just before the conclusion of World War Two. They had no wish to disrupt his conduct of the war with anyone else. It fell to Harry Truman to wrap up World War Two and to pursue the Korean War to repulse communist North Korea’s invasion.

 

The Vietnam War had its genesis in the JFK years, but it was Lyndon Johnson who committed to it with a massive influx of infantry and massive bombing, neither of which was able to deter the North Vietnamese from uniting the nation. Having lied the nation into the war LBJ concluded at the end of his first term which he had won in a landslide that he should not run again given the vast level of unhappiness with the conflict.

 

The failure to respond in a strong way to the Iranians who took U.S. diplomats hostage left Jimmy Carter with a single failed term in office. Neither domestically, nor in the area of foreign affairs did he demonstrate strength or much understanding.

After 9/11 George W. Bush used U.S. military strength to send a message to the world in general and al Qaeda in particular. By the end of his second term, a completely unknown young Democrat emerged as the Democratic Party candidate for President by campaigning on a promise to get out of Iraq and offering “hope and change.”

 

Barack Hussein Obama captured the imagination of the voters. He was black and many Americans wanted to demonstrate that an African-American could be elected President. He was relatively young, regarded as eloquent, and seemed to project a cool, self-composed approach throughout his campaign.

 

The only problem was that he lacked a resume beyond having been a “community organizer.” He had graduated from Harvard Law School, but all of his academic and other public records had been put under seal so they could not be examined. Twice he ran against relatively lackluster, older men who did not possess much charisma, if any.

 

In his first term, his “stimulus” to lift the economy out of recession was a trillion-dollar failure. By his second term, however, the singular first term “achievement” was the passage of the Affordable Patient Care Act—Obamacare. When finally ready to enroll people it instantly demonstrated technical and policy problems. Obama began to unilaterally make changes to the law even though he lacked the legal power to do so.

 

The war in Iraq whose conclusion he had ridden to victory in 2008 and 2012 came unraveled and the Syrian civil war in which he had resisted any involvement metastasized into a barbaric Islamic State that seized parts of Iraq and northern Syria.

 

Halfway through his second term, it was increasingly evident that Obama did not want to fulfill the role of the Presidency to provide leadership in times of foreign and domestic crisis.

On August 28 Gallup reported “Americans are more than twice as likely to say they “strongly disapprove” (39%) of President Barack Obama’s job performance as they are to say they “strongly approve” (17%). The percentage of Americans who strongly disapprove of Obama has increased over time, while the percentage who strongly approve has dropped by almost half.”

 

His passion for golf became noticeable in ways that went beyond just a bit of vacation time. The time he spent fund raising seemed to be more of a priority than dealing with Congress. Not only did he fail to develop strong political working relations with members of his own party, his churlish talk about the Republican Party began to grate on everyone.

 

Though no President cares much for the demands of the press, they play an essential role in a democracy. His administration went to extremes to close off access to its members and by striking out at the press in ways that turned it from one that had gone out of its way to support him in the first term to one that actively, if not openly, disliked him in the second.

 

One characteristic about Obama had become glaringly obvious. He lies all the time. He lies in obvious and casual ways. In politics where one’s word must be one’s bond, this is a lethal personality trait. He dismissed the many scandals of his administration as “phony.”

 

Given the vast implications of what is occurring in the Middle East, in Ukraine, and elsewhere around the world his response was to interrupt his golf game to give a short speech and then return to the greens. In a recent press conference he said he has “no strategy” to address the threat that ISIS represents.

 

What Americans have discovered is that they have twice either voted for (or against) someone with fewer skills and even less desire to do the job for which he campaigned. This lazyness combined with his radical liberal politics have finally become obvious even to his former supporters.

His statement that he had no strategy to deal with the threat of the Islamic State and that it was perhaps too soon to expect one to have been formulated has led to the conclusion that he was far less intellectually equipped to be President than many had thought.

 

Now he must be endured and survived.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

ObamaDishonestyandIncompetance

 

 

Border Patrol will only shoot at Americans. – Tea Party Nation

Border Patrol will only shoot at Americans. – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

 

This is a story that should make your blood boil.1a00014a

Criminals from across the Mexican border use lethal force against the American Border Patrol and they don’t shoot back.  The Border Patrol tracks drug cartel smugglers into America and are using bean bag guns against Ak-47’s.  But when they come across an armed American, shots fly.

 

From Stars and Stripes:

 

A Border Patrol agent pursuing a group of immigrants in a wooded area near the Texas-Mexico border on Friday fired several shots at an armed man who later identified himself as a militia member.

Border Patrol spokesman Omar Zamora said agents had been chasing a group of immigrants east of Brownsville Friday afternoon when an agent saw a man holding a gun near the Rio Grande. The agent fired four shots, but did not hit the man. The man then dropped his gun and identified himself as a member of a militia. Zamora said no other details were immediately available.

Cameron County Sheriff Omar Lucio, whose agency is involved in the investigation, said the incident occurred on private property and it appeared the man had permission to be there. He was not arrested, Lucio said.

The man, whose name has not been released, was wearing camouflage and carrying a long arm that was either a rifle or shotgun, Lucio said. The agent had lost the group of immigrants when he turned around and saw the man holding the weapon.

BsCRwwNIgAANfXTAn unknown number of militia members have come to the Texas border following a surge in illegal immigration this summer.

But Lucio said, “We really don’t need the militia here.” He recognized they have the right to carry weapons, but noted that with the Border Patrol, Texas Department of Public Safety and local law enforcement, there are enough agencies working to secure the border. Gov. Rick Perry also called as many as 1,000 National Guard members to the border.

Really?

Secure the border?

Who the hell is doing that?

It isn’t the Border Patrol.  They are too busy babysitting illegal aliens.  The National Guard or Texas Department of Public Safety or the local law enforcement?

Sheriff Lucio is either a liar or a moron.  None of those agencies have authorization to enforce immigration laws.

Meanwhile, the door is open for every criminal or terrorist who wants to cross our border but if you are an American, lawfully exercising your rights, the Border Patrol is going to shoot at you.mywork

Decapitating the U.S. Military – Tea Party Nation

Decapitating the U.S. Military – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan Caruba

Many Americans were shocked by the Islamic State video of the beheading of the photo journalist James Foley. Perhaps they had already forgotten the decapitation of Wall Street Journal journalist, Daniel Pearl in 2002. Most certainly, the memory of the murder of nearly 3,000 on September 11, 2001 with the destruction of the World Trade Towers has begun to recede.

 

What most do not know is that decapitation is a requirement in the Islamic holy book, the Koran.

 

“So when you meet in Jihad in Allah’s cause those who disbelieve, smite their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them…” (Surat 47, al-Qital—the Killing–, Ayat 4.

 

“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks and smite them over all their fingers and toes.” – Surat al-Anfel (The Spoils), Ayat/Verse 12.)

 

If I were a jihadist who wanted to undermine the capacity of the United States of America to both defend itself and/or to wage war on those who regard us as their enemy, I would welcome what is currently occurring to weaken our military. It is exactly what President Obama and a compliant Congress has been doing for some time now.

 

In the name of the “sequester”, an across-the-board reduction in federal spending, the military has suffered the most despite being the single key factor to defend the nation and to project our power to protect our allies.

 

An August 26 article in Politico reported that the five leading U.S. defense firms, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing’s defense unit, and Northrop Grumman, have eliminated 70,000 jobs since 2008 through layoffs, buyouts, attrition, or, as Boeing did, moving employees to the commercial side of its business. “There’s little momentum in Congress to undo the current caps on discretionary federal spending and, facing a war-weary public, U.S. officials are pledging to avoid sending combat troops to today’s hotspots, including Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine.”

 

As reported by Bloomberg News in July, “The U.S. Navy can’t meet its funding needs for surface warships and a new class of nuclear attack submarines from 2025 to 2034 according to the service’s latest 30-year shipbuilding plan.” The Navy is just one element of the Pentagon’s current five-year funding plan “in an era of declining defense spending.” It will impact the need for new submarines, the planned full production of F-35 fighter jets, and a new long-range strike bomber.

 

In March The Washington Times reported that “President Obama is seeking to abolish two highly successful missile programs that experts say have helped the U.S. Navy maintain military superiority for the past several decades.” Obama wants to eliminate the famed Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs. Why?

 

We have, however, billions for a variety of welfare programs, those devoted to “environmental research”, and countless other examples of sheer waste.

 

In January, commentator Mike Snyder raised the question, “Why are Dozens of High Ranking Officers Being Purged from the U.S. Military?”  He noted that “Since Barack Obama has been in the White House, high ranking military officers have been removed from their positions at a rate that is absolutely unprecedented. Things have gotten so bad that a number of retired generals are publicly speaking out about the ‘purge’ of the U.S. military that they believe is taking place.”

 

Retired Major General Paul Vallely was quoted as having said, “He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon, and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

 

Recognizing the threat that the Islamic State represents, even Secretary of State, John Kerry, has spoken of the need to destroy it, but he has for too long been saying that “climate change” is the most serious challenge the world is facing.

 

The U.S. has a full range of enemies such as Iran which since 1979 has declared the U.S. its enemy and continues a program to make its own nuclear weapons. Additional challenges include Russia’s actions in Russia in the Ukraine and China’s military power.

 

In July, Rowan Scarborough, a Washington Times columnist, warned that “An independent panel appointed by the Pentagon and Congress said that President Obama’s strategy for sizing the armed services is too weak for today’s global threats.” The National Defense Panel called on the President to “dump a major section of his 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review and write a broader strategy that requires the military to fight on multiple fronts at once.” That alone would require a larger military than we have now; one that is the size it was prior to World War Two!

 

How stupid is the Obama-Kerry climate change policy? In June, The Washington Times reported that “Some critics say such alarmist reports are causing the Pentagon to shift money that could be used for weapons and readiness. It is making big investments in biofuels, for example, and is working climate change into high-level strategic planning.”

 

The article quoted Sen. James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, as saying “The president’s misguided priorities with our national security can be seen in the $1 trillion defense cuts he has put into motion since taking office and then using the limited defense budget to support his green agenda.” Everything the President has said about climate change has been a lie.

 

President Obama has taken steps to open the military to homosexuals, a practice that was avoided for most of the nation’s history because of its effect on morale and he has advocated women in combat units in the name of “diversity.”

 

Questioned about it in 2013, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Joint Chiefs Chairman, referred to the requirement to introduce a “critical mass” or “significant cadre” of women into previously all-male units. Wars are not won by diversity. They are won by men who meet the physical standards and requirements of combat.

 

In May, The Washington Times reported that “These days, the U.S. military is only taking twenty percent of the applicants who walk into their local recruiter’s office intent on enlisting in the armed forces” noting that “the tough environment for potential recruits is due in large part to troop reductions in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the Pentagon’s plans to cut the size of the active duty Army.”  Cut the size?  At a time when we may need “boots on the ground” again in Iraq and a possible incursion into Syria?

 

Whether it is weapons systems needed by the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard, the Obama administration has waged its own war on America’s capacity to meet the needs of our national security currently and in the years ahead. It has waged an effort to alter the makeup of our military personnel, to reduce portions of it, and to eliminate many top officers to lead it.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

 

It isn’t just the Islamic State’s American hostages that are being decapitated. It is the U.S. military.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2014

What is the Difference Between the DNC and CPUSA? – Tea Party Nation

What is the Difference Between the DNC and CPUSA? – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

On the home page of the Communist Party USA it says “A better and peaceful world is possible—a world where people and nature come before profits. That’s socialism. That’s our vision. We are the Communist Party USA.”

No, it’s not Socialism which is a watered down version of Communism. Real Communism is the kind that was practiced in the former Soviet Union. It can be found in Cuba and North Korea where the state controls all power and property,and the people have none.

Modified versions exist in China, Russia, Venezuela, and other nations where some aspects of Capitalism are maintained for the sake of their economies. In the West Socialism was incorporated by both the U.S. and Great Britain, and other nations via various social welfare programs.

Capitalism is about profits, innovation, entrepreneurship, and investment. It is about the freedom to acquire wealth. It emphasizes work, not welfare. It is the reason America has a dynamic economic system—when it is permitted to prosper, free from federal interference.

In America, conservatives have always been acutely aware of Communism, but the 47% who still approve of Barack Obama and those who are members of the Democratic Party are the dupes of those whose quest for tyrannical power permits them to tell the most appalling lies, particularly about Republicans.

The Democratic Party is so politically corrupt and devoid of moral standards that it is currently engaged in seeking to harm potential Republican presidential candidates with an utterly bogus indictment of Texas Governor Perry and the slanders leveled against New Jersey Governor Christie. It is a tactic of those who fear a loss at the ballot box.

It is the Democratic Party and its elected officials that have advanced the global warming hoax, now called climate change and the CPUSA website refers to the “Accumulation of greenhouse gases (as) a ‘planetary emergency’” This is what both the President and the Secretary of State are saying, but there has been no warming on a planet that is now 17 years into a cooling cycle.

As for those “greenhouse” gases, nitrogen and oxygen are the most abundant in the atmosphere, followed by nothing more dangerous than water vapor! Carbon dioxide is a very minor gas at 0.04%. And most importantly, the Earth is not a greenhouse. When the Sun’s radiation is reduced due to its own natural cycles, it gets colder.

Tied to the climate change message is an agenda that includes Obama’s “war on coal” and his refusal to permit the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from our neighbor Canada, among other measures to restrict access and use of America’s vast energy reserves. This is an attack on the nation’s economy in the name of “nature” or the “environment.”

The CPUSA wants “No new sanctions on Iran” and the administration’s negotiations with Iran to slow or end its nuclear weapons program have dropped some sanctions to get them to the table, but no one believes that Iran will stop because they are openly avowed enemies of America and Israel.

If you wanted to harm America, you would undermine its southern border so that thousands of illegal aliens could join the estimated eleven million already here. That is what President Obama has done and he is joined by former Democratic Majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi who said of the illegals, “We are all Americans.” No, they are not.

The chair of the Democratic National Committee, Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, continues to push for amnesty for illegal aliens saying “It isn’t about politics at all. They (illegal aliens) essentially have become the backbone of the economy.” The Center for Immigration Studies has documented the many jobs that have gone to illegal aliens, leaving native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens with fewer employment opportunities.

In July Gallup reported that “With thousands of undocumented immigrant minors crossing the nation’s southern border in recent months, the percentage of Americans citing immigration as the top problem has surged to 17% this month, up from 5% in June, and the highest seen since 2006. As a result, immigration now virtually ties ‘dissatisfaction with government’ at 16%, as the primary issue Americans think of when asked to name the country’s top problems.”

The Affordable Patient Care Act—Obamacare—is the perfect example of Socialism in its government control of what once was the world’s finest healthcare system and is being destroyed by a law for which only Democrats in Congress voted.

President Obama has illegally asserted more power than the Constitution grants the executive branch, unilaterally altering Obamacare. It is the reason the House of Representatives is suing him.

For several generations since the last century, Americans have been indoctrinated to accept an ever-growing central government, but even so an August Reason-Rupe survey poll found that fully 54% favored a smaller government providing fewer services. Just 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 75% disapprove.

Though education is never mentioned in the Constitution, we have a Department of Education and the same applies to the Department of Energy, both created by Jimmy Carter. A Nixon executive order brought about the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency that is masterminding an attack on private property along with the manufacturing, agricultural and energy sectors of the economy.

If one looks at the Democratic Party today, there is often scant difference between it and the self-professed Communist Party USA which twice endorsed the election of Barack Obama, a man whose father was a Communist, whose grandparents who helped raise him were Socialists, and who was mentored in his youth by a card-carrying member of the CPUSA.

We have a President who believes that the problems throughout the world have been caused by America. His disdain for the nation and the military that serves to protect it is on full display. And the Democratic Party twice chose him as its candidate.

If you want to see what Communism looks like, acts and says, watch and listen to the Democratic Party.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion – Tea Party Nation

Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

 

The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution do not abandon religion, they embrace it. They do not, however, require that Americans believe in God, nor punish them for failing to do so.

 

Central to the liberties enshrined in these documents is the belief that they come from a higher power and America exists because of that belief. Without it there would have been no America. There are those among us who insist that, as a nation, we abandon faith in God and, if we do, America will cease to be a power for good in the world.

 

When Thomas Jefferson presented the Declaration to those who would pledge their lives and their sacred honor to achieve independence from England John Adams asked that it include the words “They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” after the phrase “all men are created equal” and Benjamin Franklin agreed, suggesting that “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence” be added as well.” In their 2004 book, “Under God” by Toby Mac and Michael Tait, said “The changes demonstrated Congress’s strong reliance upon God—as delegates added the words “appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions.”

 

Aware of the dangers inherent in a state religion, the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” followed by freedom of speech, the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievance.” There is no state religion in America, but reflecting the values that created it, its leaders have always acknowledged a greater power than government, the belief in God.

 

There would be no America if the Pilgrims who established Plymouth, Massachusetts had not left England in the quest for their right to worship as they wished, reflecting the Protestant Reformation. Another early settlement, Jamestown, was a business venture by investors to obtain wealth. Jamestown failed and Plymouth is with us today.

 

I am not a religious person per se, but I do believe in God. Always have and always will. I don’t insist that anyone else has to and neither do our founding documents. They did, however, acknowledge God and sought His protection to create a new nation; a republic with clearly stated protections for all its citizens.

 

There are, however, those who insist that any reference to God be removed from public documents and recognition. The leader among them is the Freedom From Religion Foundation and their most recent lawsuit is against the U.S. Treasury Department claiming they are discriminating against non-believers by including the phrase “In God We Trust” on the nation’s currency. Their claim is that the government is prohibited from endorsing religion over non-religion.

 

“In God We Trust” on U.S. coins was first approved by Congress during the Civil War in 1864. In 1956, Congress passed a resolution to recognize the words officially as the national motto, replacing the de facto phrase, “E Pluribus Unum” and it has appeared on U.S. currency since 1957.

 

The Foundation’s intention is to make any acknowledgement of God illegal by any public institution. If that is true, then we might was well tear up the Declaration and Constitution. Atheists are not content to not believe in God, they insist that everyone else not believe as well. That is a form of tyranny we must not permit to exist in America.

 

The Freedom from Religion Foundation specializes in lawsuits to advance what it calls the separation of church and state, but this principle is enshrined in the Constitution along with the right to freely exercise one’s faith. Its lawsuits are designed to destroy religion in America. In 2012 the Foundation had total contributions of $2,726,316. Nearly 90% was devoted to its attack on the freedom of religion.

 

In 2013, the Huffington Post reported that In the past six years the Foundation’s paid membership had increased 130 percent. It was estimated at “nearly 20,000” members. Its co-president, Laurie Gaylor, said that recent high-profile legal victories had increased the foundation’s popularity.

 

There is still strong support in Congress for the freedom of religion. In 1993 it passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act aimed at preventing laws that substantially burden a person’s free exercise of religion. It was signed into law by President Clinton. In 1997 the Supreme Court found that it was unconstitutional if applied to states, ruling that it was not a proper exercise of Congress’s enforcement power. It does, however, still apply to the federal government. In response, some states passed their own religious freedom restoration acts.

 

The Act was recently cited by the Supreme Court that ruled that closely held companies may be exempted from a government requirement to include contraceptives in employee health insurance coverage if it contravenes their belief in the sanctity of life.

 

There are millions more Americans who belong to various religious faiths and who believe that America must protect their right to exercise their faith. A relatively small Freedom From Religion Foundation will continue to use the courts to impose their atheistic views on any public institution. They must be resisted if America is to remain a citadel to the world as a place where people of faith can live together and exercise the tolerance that the atheists will not.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2014

The History of Article V: Reclaiming Our Heritage – AMAC, Inc. AMAC, Inc.

The History of Article V: Reclaiming Our Heritage – AMAC, Inc.

by Michael Farris -obama- defending constitution laughing

George Mason was a visionary of liberty. He was the chief force behind the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1776—the document which provided the framework for the Bill of Rights fifteen years later.

As a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, Mason was concerned that despite the best intentions of leaders like James Madison and George Washington, the federal government might grow beyond acceptable limits and invade the people’s liberty.

As the convention was winding towards its end, Mason realized there was a crucial oversight in the proposed method for future constitutional amendments. The proposal on the floor provided that all amendments would be proposed by Congress and then would be ratified by the states.  Mason, however, contended that under this process, Congress would never propose amendments to rein in the power of the federal government. Consequently, there was no ultimate check to keep the government from growing too large.

Like the other key leaders of his generation, Mason understood that the most important protection for liberty was a structure of government that funneled power through a strict system of checks and balances. According to Mason, the states were the ultimate check on the federal government. So Mason suggested, and the Framers unanimously agreed, that the states needed to have a way to propose amendments too.

This is why Article V of the Constitution provides two methods to propose amendments to the Constitution. Congress can propose amendments when two-thirds of both houses of Congress approve an amendment. Alternatively, state legislatures can apply for a convention to propose amendments on a particular topic. Once two-thirds of the states apply, Congress has a mandatory duty to call such a convention by naming the time and place for the convention to begin.

Virginia lost no time applying for such a convention. In November of 1788, before the new government under the Constitution was operational, the legislature of Virginia passed an application under Article V applying for a “Convention of the States” for the purpose of proposing a bill of rights and other similar amendments.mywork

Virginia’s legislature was composed of many of the same people who wrote and ratified the Constitution. They knew what Article V said, they knew what it meant, and they intended to use it. The states were trusted to limit the power of the federal government. And they knew that Article V existed, not for the purpose of rewriting the whole Constitution, but to propose particular amendments. Ultimately, of course, Congress passed a bill of rights and the states were satisfied.

There have been over 400 applications for a Convention of States (COS) passed by the state legislatures in the 226 years since that first application. But, there has never been a COS because two-thirds of the states have never agreed on a particular subject.

This leads us to the first iron-clad rule of constitutional law governing a COS: The states must agree on the agenda for the COS and until the states set the agenda, no convention is convened.

A COS was designed to stop federal abuses of power, which begs the most obvious question in American politics today: Is the federal government abusing its power?

Thomas Jefferson would say that the answer to this question is self-evident.  No sensible person can deny that every branch of the federal government is abusing its power.

Congress legislates on topics using power it does not have. It spends money—trillions of dollars—that it does not have. The President regularly legislates—a power he does not have—through executive orders and regulations. The Supreme Court rewrites the Constitution—a power it clearly does not have—through interpretations of the so-called “living Constitution.”

The Founders would be furious with the federal government’s abuse power even if it was using its power wisely install effective policies. But the chaos, debt, and devastation created by the federal government proves the truth of one of the Founders’ central beliefs: Tyranny never results in wise government.

To be clear, the federal government is not only abusive, it is also incompetent.

The Founders would not be surprised by these abuses, but they would be shocked that we have tolerated them for so long. They would demand an accounting for the gift of liberty that they fought and died to give us. And when we tried to blame Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court, they would shake their heads. “We gave you Article V,” they would say. “We gave you the power the power to stop tyranny. Why haven’t you used it?”

Internal threats are always the greatest dangers to liberty. We must use the Constitution’s own system of checks and balances to save this nation and our legacy of liberty. And we need to do it now.Image

(Please visit www.conventionofstates.com for more information).

RACIST or REALIST in 2014 ? – Tea Party Nation

RACIST or REALIST in 2014 ? – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by BILL HALLIGAN

In light of the continuing violence & destruction in Ferguson, MO which erupted as a result of the police-involved shooting death of Michael Brown (6’4”, nearly 300 pound teenager –  just committed a robbery), it may be beneficial for some HONEST self-examination by us all to determine what our individual perceptions of this ongoing disturbance (and the re-occurrence of similar incidents of violence & destruction) really indicate about OBAMA’s American Society in 2014.

Metaphorically speaking… CLOSE YOUR EYES.  (Obviously you can’t read this post with eyes closed… hence, the Metaphor reference).

With your eyes closed, CLEAR your Mind of all thoughts and prepare to receive a VISUAL IMAGE when you hear the next Word:

RIOT

Now… did you envision throngs of Asian Foreign Exchange students overturning trash cans on college campuses, protesting tuition costs?

No ?  Neither did I.

Sadly, we as a society in America have become so conditioned by the constant VIOLENT DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR that follows practically every police-involved shooting of a “Black Youth”, that we Americans not only EXPECT such violent behavior, we resignedly ACCEPT it.

Our self-destructive passive tolerance of INTOLERABLE actions by criminal thugs who capitalize on tragedy to foment insurrection, violence, and destruction (Burning, Looting, Assault, Firebombs, etc.) is truly indicative of just how LOW our American Society has been dragged down by the “Political Correctness Police”, Race Hucksters, the Liberal Progressives, and even by the President (who has dispatched Eric Holder & the DOJ to Ferguson, MO).

What business has the US DOJ in investigating a local shooting incident (other than to further inflame an already inflammatory issue)?  What message does it send when the President issues statements to the Liberal Mainstream Media before ANY investigation results of the incident have been made public ?  The issue of minority shooting deaths could better be investigated by sending Holder and the DOJ to places like Chicago or Detroit, rather than to Ferguson, MO.  But, the essential element of RACIAL TENSION simply doesn’t exist when both victim and shooter are of the same race.  So, Obama gets much more “RACIAL MILEAGE” out of stoking the flames of “Civil Unrest” when he can.  And any criticism of Obama for shameless pandering to minority “interests” at these times is immediately called RACISM.

America in 2014 is being dragged through much of the Racial Mud that the hard work of the Civil Rights movement of the early 60s sought to wash away from our collective soul.

And, sadly, current-day Race Relations are now suffering badly for it.

So now….. back to our visual image TEST…..

What vision popped into your own mind at the word: RIOT ?

Be HONEST.

Does that image make you a RACIST ???  Or merely a REALIST ?

If you can honestly answer REALIST, it’s a harsh new reality, isn’t it ?

Welcome to Obama’s Transformation of America in 2014.

Which begs another question in search of an HONEST response.

How’s all that “HOPE & CHANGE” feel now ?

Obama, Spectacularly Wrong – Tea Party Nation

Obama, Spectacularly Wrong – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan CarubaTaliban-Fans

“A greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum”

The speaker had what one might imagine, given his background, a better insight into Islam, Muslims, and the Middle East than others who had preceded him. He said he was seeking “a new beginning” that was “based on mutual interests and mutual respect” because his nation and those in the Middle East shared “common principles—principles of justice and progress, tolerance and dignity of all human beings.”

He cited “civilization’s debt to Islam” and noted that there were more than 1,200 mosques in his country. He declared that his nation would never be “at war with Islam” and he quoted from “the holy Koran” several times during his speech.

Five years later, noting the Islamic holiday of “Eid-al-Fitr” on July 28, he said “In the United States, Eid also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy,” but the U.S. did not elect its first Muslim-American congressman until 2007. No Muslims took part in our founding.

At one point he cited his nation’s “strong bonds with Israel” calling them “unbreakable.” Noting the Holocaust in which six million Jews were killed, he said that “Threatening Israel with destruction—or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews is deeply wrong” but that he deemed the situation of Palestinians “intolerable” adding that “Palestinians must abandon violence.” Noting his opposition to Israeli settlements, he managed to be on both sides of the issues that divide Israel and its Palestinian opponents.

1a00014aTurning his attention to Iran, he noted that “For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country”, citing reasons why Iranians felt justified to feel that way. He also pointed out that Iran “has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence” against U.S troops and civilians.”

“It is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point” and that preventing “a nuclear arms race in the Middle East could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path” adding that “No single nation should pick and choose which nations have nuclear weapons.” Presumably he was referring to Israel which would be directly threatened, indeed destroyed, by an Iranian nuclear weapon.

While noting the “controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years” he asserted that “No system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any another” despite the fact that the U.S. invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq specifically to impose new governments that would not threaten the U.S. and its interests in the Middle East.

Citing religious freedom, he said that “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance” but noted that “Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s”…and fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.”

On August 7, after ignoring Iraqi and Kurdish requests for military aid in the form of weapons to fight the Islamic State (IS) for months, in the wake of its attacks on Christians in Iraq. the potential genocide of Yezidi men, women and children driven from their homes, and an attack on Erbil where the U.S. has a consulate and Baghdad where we have an embassy, he authorized “targeted military action in Iraq.”

He concluded by noting that “It is easier to start wars than to end them”, but Barack Obama, speaking in Cairo on June 4, 2009, mere months after having taken office in his first term, said he believed “We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning…”

His new beginning was demonstrated by withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq. The result of that action, combined with doing nothing as the Islamic State of Iraq, Syria and the Levant emerged from the Syrian civil war and severed the northern portion of Iraq, adding it to the portion of Syria it controls, has left a Middle East that faces a regional war with a fanatical Islamist entity.

With the benefit of hindsight, we can see how lacking in understanding of Islam, history, and the Middle East Obama he was. His Cairo speech became part of what came to be known as his “apology tour” as he spoke in other nations, making it clear that he thought the U.S. was the cause of many problems in the world and that he was endowed with some special capacity to make things right again at home and abroad.

The irony of the speech is that it was spoken by a man for whom no leader in the Middle East has any respect, putting the Prime Minister of Israel and the Supreme Leader of Iran on the same page together. Add to them the leaders of virtually all other nations. Obama thought he could dictate to Israel and could charm the Iranians to make concessions. He was wrong.

Obama was wrong about the Muslims that have been slaughtering Christians in the Middle East and Africa and he has been largely silent about it. The leader of the Islamic State that has captured a large swath of northern Iraq, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, recently anointed himself “Caliph Ibrahim” and told his fellow Muslims that “This is the duty on Muslims that has been lost for centuries.”

Obama was wrong that no nation can impose a system of government on another when the history of Islam has been the determination to impose Sharia law wherever it gained power and the history of Communism was the imposition of that system in Eastern Europe and elsewhere like Cuba until the collapse of the Soviet Union freed its subjugated nations, though Cuba has continued to be subject to the Castro dictatorship.

These days, Iran is still playing Obama for a fool while pursuing its quest to build its own nuclear weapons. The Russian Federation has seized the Crimea from Ukraine. Latin American nations are dumping their children into an America that has no real border anymore.

Since he gave that speech in 2009, the Middle East has seen the rise of the Islamic State stretching from Syria to Iraq. Syria remains embroiled in a civil war. The Palestinians are again attacking Israel. Iran is still intent on building its own nuclear weapons. Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have removed former dictators.

If you read Barack Obama’s Cairo speech from start to finish, you cannot come away with any other impression than that a self-deluded fool gave it, a man determined to avoid confronting the enemies of mankind unless an Islamic-inspired genocide requires it.

© Alan Caruba, 2014istandwith israel

Solving the Gaza war – Tea Party Nation

Solving the Gaza war – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips 

 

Israel is almost a month into its war against Hamas in the Gaza strip.  The results are unfortunately predictable.  Israel is winning the military war.  Hamas is winning the media war.  Leftists all around the world, the new Nazis, are flush with anti-Semitism. 

 

Barack Obama, who makes Neville Chamberlin look like a powerful leader, forces Israel into a “peace in our time” cease fire. That cease fire lasted all of 90 minutes, as Hamas attacked Israel again and killed three Israel soldiers. 

There is a solution.  It is a radical solution but it is better than the alternative of war every two years.

 What is that solution?

 Israel needs to do what it does best.

 In needs to win militarily. 

 It needs to go into Gaza and defeat Hamas militarily.

 Then it needs to start exporting every Muslim in Gaza.  Send them to Syria.  Send them to Turkey.  Send them to Somalia where there is no organized government to complain.  Deport the Muslims and leave the Christians.

 You can hear the shrieks of outrage from the left already.

 That’s “ethnic cleansing.”

 You know what.  That’s right.

 Muslims in the Gaza strip are already engaging in ethnic cleansing of Christians in the area.  Christians are forced to live as second-class citizens.  Their churches are damaged or destroyed.  They are persecuted and killed.  The lucky ones immigrate.

 What would happen if Israel deported all of the Muslims in Gaza?

 For one thing, there would be peace.

 Hamas would no longer be building tunnels into Israel so that its terrorists can go on suicide missions.  Hamas would no longer be firing rockets into Israel from hospitals and schools in Gaza.

 Since World War II, the west, including Israel has this mind set that once wars begin a peace must be negotiated.  Anyone remember World War II?  The world did not negotiate with Hitler.  We bombed Germany until the rubble bounced and since then Germany has been a good world citizen.

 Wars are not about sending some dolt like John Kerry around the world to beg a civilized nation to sit at the table and negotiate with people who want to completely wipe them out.  Wars are about winning.

 The Gaza war is not about Israel versus Hamas.  It is about Islam versus Israel. It is about Islam versus the west and western civilization.

 If Israel stops short of completely wiping out Hamas, two years from now there will be another war. And another war after that.

 Peace treaties can be signed between civilized nations. But when Hamas has as its stated goal to completely wipe out the State of Israel, there is no negotiation with them.

 There is only victory or defeat.

istandwith israel

 

Yes, Sue Our Lawless President! – Tea Party Nation

Yes, Sue Our Lawless President! – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

Not finished 

“Today, however, President Obama has taken the concept of discretion and so distorted it, and has taken the obligation of faithful enforcement and so rejected it, that his job as chief law enforcer has become one of incompetent madness or chief lawbreaker. Time after time, in areas as disparate as civil liberties, immigration, foreign affairs and health care, the president has demonstrated a propensity for rejecting his oath and doing damage to our fabric of liberty that cannot easily be undone by a successor.”

 That is Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, a Fox News commentator, writing in the July 31 edition of The Washington Times.

 Americans and many around the world are increasingly fearful of a President who has demonstrated no regard for the checks and balances of our incredible Constitution, the oldest in the world that still functions to protect individual rights and which sets forth the divisions between our legislative, judicial and executive departments of government.

 Congress, however, will not impeach President Obama, but the House will sue him on the basis of just one of the many examples of his dictatorial use of executive orders to ignore the power of the legislative branch to pass laws he took an oath to enforce. He has unilaterally and illegally altered the Affordable Care Act 27 times, his signature legislature that former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, told us Congress had to pass “so we can find out what is in it.” No Republican member of Congress voted for this two-thousand-page-plus law, passed late in the evening of Christmas Eve, 2009.

 The decision to impeach a President is essentially a political one and Republicans understand that the impeachment of President Obama would be interpreted by nearly half of the voters as an attack on a President they support. There have only been two impeachment actions in U.S. history and both have failed.

 The nation is significantly divided regarding the President and Congress has been in gridlock as Democrats the Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has refused to let more than 300 House bills sent to the Senate be debated and voted upon.

 Suing the President has ample history. It is hardly “a stunt” as Democrats have labeled it. New York Democrat Louise Slaughter called it “preposterous”, but failed to mention that eight years earlier, in 2006, she was a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by congressional Democrats against George W. Bush!

 In a 1939 case, Coleman v Miller, the Supreme Court granted standing to members of the legislature to sue. Two years ago, four Democratic members of the House filed a suit against Vice President Biden in his capacity as head of the Senate, challenging as unconstitutional the filibuster. Other Democratic legislators had filed lawsuits claiming standing in 2001, in 2002, in

2006, and in 2007. The judiciary concluded their cases had little merit.

 In a July 30 Wall Street Journal commentary, David B. Rivken who served in the Reagan and Bush administration’s Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s Office, and Elizabeth Price Foley, a constitutional law professor at Florida International University, wrote:

 “These barriers between the branches are not formalities—they were designed to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in one branch. As the Supreme Court explained in New York v. United States (1992), the ‘Constitution protects us from our own best intentions. It divides power among sovereigns and among branches of government precisely so that we may resist the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day.”

 “Congress has the exclusive authority to make law because lawmaking requires pluralism, debate and compromise, the essence of representative government…Litigation in federal court is an indispensable way to protect all branches of government against encroachment on their authority,”

 “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” said President Obama. In April, A poll by PolitiFact of the Tampa Bay Times, revealed that 63%–two thirds—of respondents agreed that President Obama lies at least some of the time on important issues and an additional 20% said he lies every now and then. Only 15% believed the President is completely truthful. Democrats were 39% of the 1,021 registered voters polled. Republicans were 38% and independents were 20%,

 The President has lied so routinely that this character flaw is likely to play a role in the forthcoming midterm elections on November 4. When you add in his lawlessness and his leadership failures that have created a far more dangerous and divided world, Americans are likely to vote for change in Congress.

 That’s how democracy works and how our Constitutional system works. Suing the President is just one part of it.

 © Alan Caruba, 2014

Image

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,893 other followers