Undecided Now Playing: Alien Resurrection Topic: Politics
In a video plea sent to Donks late last month the Presiden urged
"It will be up to each of you to make sure that the young people, African-Americans, Latinos and women, who powered our victory in 2008, stand together once again," Obama said. "It will be up to each of you to keep our nation moving forward."
At a Cinco de Mayo reception at the White House Wednesday evening, President Obama launched another attack on Arizona's new immigration law. "We can’t start singling out people because of who they look like, or how they talk, or how they dress," the president told the crowd. As he had in earlier criticisms of the law, Obama ignored the law's specific stipulation that any check on a person's immigration status can only come after a "lawful stop, detention or arrest" when a person is suspected of breaking some law -- that is, as Arizona lawmakers explained in a footnote to the bill, it must come "during the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state."
Can you hear the environmentalists weeping and gnashing their teeth shouting “where was he? Why was he yucking it up with Jay Leno while sea-life was imperiled?
Do you hear anyone sneering “you, sir, and your administration have failed in your duty,” or cries of “incompetence!” and “cronyism” and “arrogant disinterest” from the MSNBC mouths as you pass the channel?
Anyone organizing a telethon and announcing “Barack Obama hates beaches and killer whales,”?
They have left their guardposts. They are on break. They are no longer sure about things; what used to be evil is now an acceptable norm, not worth noticing!
Who is looking out for the little guy, and the environment?
Who is going to charge the president to put the people over the powerful, the porpoises over the profligates, and to refuse the bribery of Big-Corporate-Big-Interest campaign money?
Who is going to look out for us, now that the self-appointed guardians who were so vigilant until January of 2009 have suddenly gone silent?
No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor.
(Gov. Jan Brewer quoted him in this piece defending the new Arizona immigration law.)
More on the AZ Boycott Now Playing: Uncommon Knowledge Topic: Politics
On his Facebook page, Mohammad Eljahmi, brother of the late Libyan dissident Fathi Eljahmi, raises a good point regarding the Boston City Council's divestment resolution regarding Arizona after its immigration bill. As Eljahmi notes, "Pathetic. They salivate on business from Libya, China and Saudi Arabia but want to cripple an American state."
The Phoenix Suns showed solidarity with the illegals by donning their “Los Sols” jerseys. Perhaps they should've pulled ticket takers, let everyone in that wanted in, and charged season ticket holders for all the concessions sold.
California is boycotting Arizona because of the Arizona immigration law. But weren't we already supposed to be boycottingCaliforniabecause of Prop. 8?
The Forty Niners don't need to worry about it. Arizona hosts Super Bowls!
"We the People" Now Playing: Foundations of Libertarianism Topic: Politics
I don't agree with ALL of these, but these 50 candidates seem to be on the right track following in the steps of the Conrac with America.
"We are citizen-candidates united on a platform of six simple and realistic reforms for our government:
Apply the Law Equally: All laws that apply to all citizens also apply to Congress
Term Limits: Limit terms in Congress to no more than 12 years in the House and Senate, respectively
Enforce Congressional Ethics: Yearly tax and expense audits, former Congressmen and their staff cannot be lobbyists, allow the ethics committee to do their job
Read the Bill: Prior to final vote, the entire bill must be read out loud on the floor of the House; if a representative is not present for the entire reading, he cannot vote
Tax Reform: Repeal our current tax code in favor of one that taxes only once, at one rate, and require a 2/3-majority vote for any new tax
Balance the Budget: Amend the Constitution to require a balanced budget"
Hope they shake things up a little. Go to the website and view the scores of candidates who have signed on.
Jumping the Shark Now Playing: Libertarian Tradition Topic: Politics
There's a REASON those of us dislike that state up north. Lot's of crap comes out of it. Like these outtakes from President Obama's speech to this year's U of M grads, curtesy ofLurita Doan
“All you hear in Washington is the clamor of politics – a noise that can drown out the voices of the people who sent you there.” This, of course, is precious, coming as it does from the leader of the Democratic party, which had to twist arms and bribe legislators to vote for a flawed healthcare bill because members of congress–who were listening to the “voices of the people”–were afraid to vote for a bloated bill that did little to address the most pressing problems in healthcare, a bill which their constituents loudly and repeatedly told congress they didn’t want.
“We’ve got politicians calling each other all sorts of unflattering names.” which may be why in 400 speeches and Q&A sessions, delivered in his first year in office, Obama finds occasion to demonize or blame President George W. Bush, and why Obama, 16 months into his presidency, continues to use Bush as the whipping boy for bad left wing policies.
“The media tends to play up every hint of conflict, because it makes for a sexier story – which means anyone interested in getting coverage feels compelled to make the most outrageous comments.” This may explain Obama’s unexpected attack, during the Henry Louis Gates fiasco, in which Obama admitted he did not know the details, but proceeded to attack the Cambridge police department saying that “Cambridge police acted stupidly”, when responding to a 911 call about a alleged break-in at a residence in Cambridge.
“Politics has never been for the thin-skinned” which doesn’t explain why President Obama is so sensitive to criticism. remember when Major Garrett, of Fox News, asked the question that most of America wanted to the answer to: “What took you so long to be concerned about Iraq?” And, Obama seemed quite irritated?
“American democracy has thrived because we have recognized the need for a government that, while limited, can still help us adapt to a changing world.” Then why has Obama ignored the concept of a “limited” government and, instead, presided over the greatest expansion in the federal government’s size and intrusiveness in the lives of Americans in the past 70 years?
“We have held fast to the belief that government doesn’t have all the answers, and we have cherished and fiercely defended our individual freedom.” Then how does he explain the federal government intruding into an every wider range of our personal decisions with wild abandon? Under President Obama, government now wants to direct our use of salt, the purchase of fizzy drinks, legislate how many light bulbs we can use in hot tubs and even provide advice on whether dogs should be given bones?
“We, the people, hold in our hands the power to choose our leaders, change our laws, and shape our own destiny.” Of course, that doesn’t include White House interference in open senate seat appointments or rushing through a healthcare reform bill that less than 1% of Congress had read, and which few Americans had been allowed to view because, as Nancy Pelosi said: “you have to pass the bill if we want to find out what’s in it“, Nor does it explain White House antipathy to the Tea Party movement which is comprised of Americans who want the opportunity to shape their own destiny.
“We know that too much government can stifle competition, deprive us of choice, and burden us with debt.” Of course Obama knows this–he’s the one who’s doing it.
“Our government shouldn’t try to guarantee results”. Then, why has the government interfered with free markets, funding bailout after bailout? Why has the White House advanced legislation that refuses to allow foreclosures on delinquent mortgages? Why have Unions and other favorites been promised additional benefits and expanded roles in our economy at the cost of the free market?
“We cannot expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down.” Perhaps President Obama could follow his own advice and not blame President Bush for Obama Administration spending sprees, not blame Rush Limbaugh for the Obama Administration’s policy mis-steps and flawed decision making, not criticize Fox News for reporting what they hear and see, not cry “racism” every time opponents have an honest policy disagreement.
“This kind of vilification and over-the-top rhetoric closes the door to the possibility of compromise.” This one is rich. No President has ever so blindly fallowed the Saul Alinksy tactic (identify, isolate, and vilify) strategy to achieve his political goals. Obama seems to have found no shortage of villains to isolate and demonize when the time was right: Healthcare executives, Wall Street, Bankers, Cambridge Policemen, have all served the President well as political piñatas.
“Part of what civility requires is that we recall the simple lesson most of us learned from our parents: treat others as you would like to be treated, with courtesy and respect.” And yet Mr. Obama continues to treat all Americans as if they were mathematically impaired and unable to add up the growing number of promises that will add even more pressure on an already escalating mountain of debt. Telling children that they can have it all, that they can and should have all the goodies they want, paid for by someone else, is not good parenting.
“If we choose only to expose ourselves to opinions and viewpoints that are in line with our own, studies suggest that we will become more polarized and set in our ways.” So why does President Obama allow the Democratic leadership in Congress to draft legislation behind closed door, excluding Republicans?
“When we don’t pay close attention to the decisions made by our leaders; when we fail to educate ourselves about the major issues of the day; when we choose not to make our voices and opinions heard, that’s when democracy breaks down.” Case in point.
Much like the Fonz, who first jumped the shark in Happy Days, with this commencement speech at the University of Michigan, President Obama may have jumped the shark with his teleprompted rhetoric, and reached the point where whatever he says from this point forward has no, absolutely no, credibility because the dichotomy between his words and his actions is so very extreme, and Obama seems oblivious to these differences.
And you know, it starts at the top - CNBC: Obama Is A Bully. “He seems to view dissension not as healthy public debate but as a suspicious, pernicious challenge to his omnipotence and popularity. . . . I can’t remember of any other President in my memory having done this. Nixon maybe? An unfortunate comparison, indeed.”
In Nazi Germany Jews were not permitted to leave the country (at least not when it really mattered). Jews in fact begged to be deported or expelled. In Denmark Jews were deported -- to Germany. So how does America end up the Nazi-like country here? If the Denmark example applies, it would make Mexico the Nazi-like country and America the modern-day Denmark. Except the illegals don't want to be deported and Mexico isn't killing its own repatriated emigrants.
So what am I missing? Well, some might respond that I don't get it. You see, we're (actually just Arizona) treating illegal immigrants like second class citizens with fewer rights than everybody else. But, not to be rude, aren't illegal aliens already a different class of people within our legal system and isn't it obviously true that they have fewer rights than American citizens?
Then there was THIS little gem: Conservative supporters of Arizona’s illegal-immigration law should seize this moment to cut the following deal with President Obama and liberals who object to the statute on the basis that it will result in racial profiling:
The statute’s opponents, including President Obama, agree not to support racial profiling in college admissions, public employment, the awarding of government contracts, or in their descriptions of tea partiers, critics of Obamacare, talk-radio hosts, and Cambridge cops. In return, supporters of the Arizona law agree to insert a provision explicitly prohibiting racial profiling.
