Archive for June, 2012

Obama Administration Instruction To Border Patrol If They Are Fired Upon: ‘Run Away’ And ‘Hide’

June 30, 2012

Do you remember the Monty Python flick about the “Holy Grail”?

What did they do whenever they were attacked?

“Run away!” 

And Obama hastily adds, “and hide.”

Now the United States Border Patrol are making Monty Python required instructional viewing to comply with Obama’s new policy:

Border Patrol union blasts Homeland Security instructions to ‘run away’ and ‘hide’ from gunmen
By Perry Chiaramonte
Published June 29, 2012
FoxNews.com

Border Patrol agents in Arizona are blasting their bosses for telling them, along with all other Department of Homeland Security employees, to run and hide if they encounter an “active shooter.”

It’s one thing to tell civilian employees to cower under a desk if a gunman starts spraying fire in a confined area, say members of Tucson Local 2544/National Border Patrol Council, but to give armed law enforcement professionals the same advice is downright insulting. The instructions from DHS come in the form of pamphlets and a mandatory computer tutorial.

“We are now taught in an ‘Active Shooter’ course that if we encounter a shooter in a public place we are to ‘run away’ and ‘hide’” union leader Brandon Judd wrote on the website of 3,300-member union local. “If we are cornered by such a shooter we are to (only as a last resort) become ‘aggressive’ and ‘throw things’ at him or her. We are then advised to ‘call law enforcement’ and wait for their arrival (presumably, while more innocent victims are slaughtered).”

The FEMA-administered computer course, entitled “IS-907- Active Shooter: What You Can Do,” is a 45-minute tutorial that provides guidance to all employees on how to recognize indicators of possible workplace violence and what to do should their office be invaded by gunmen and focuses around three main options; either evacuate, hide out, or in dire circumstances, take action.

Main Points of the “Active Shooter” training course
  • Evacuate: If there is an accessible escape path, attempt to evacuate the premises.
  • Hide out: If evacuation is not possible, find a place to hide where the active shooter is less likely to find
    you.
  • Take action: As a last resort, and only when your life is in imminent danger, attempt to disrupt and/or
    incapacitate the active shooter.

Once the course is completed, employees are urged to download additional materials including a summary booklet and pocket-sized card outlining protocol, which was also handed out to employees two months ago.

One DHS employee told FoxNews.com the instruction cards were handed out to employees six weeks ago. At the time, he assumed they were only for civilian employees, not armed law enforcement officers within the department, which oversees the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

“Requiring BP agents to follow the same steps is egregious,” he said.

DHS officials maintain that the Active Shooter course was designed for all employees—civilian and law-enforcement officers– and no one should rush into a situation where they, or others around them, could get hurt.

“The Department of Homeland Security takes very seriously its responsibility to protect all of its employees from threats that may surface in the workplace,” U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman Michael Friel said in a written statement to FoxNews.com

“CBP workforce training is designed to prepare all employees, including leaders, managers, supervisors, law enforcement personnel and non-law enforcement personnel, to understand their own roles and the roles of their fellow employees in responding to threats. In an active shooter scenario, employees are taught to take actions that keep them alive.”

But members of Local 2544 say they are obligated to protect the public in such a situation, whether they are on duty or not. Given the instructions, some wonder if they would be disciplined for taking down a gunman in a situation like the Fort Hood shooting or the January, 2011 case in Casa Adobes, in which a deranged gunmen shot 19 people, including Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Six people were killed.

“It is always comforting to know that for those of us who carry a weapon when we are off-duty, if we should encounter such a situation, stop a shooter and save countless lives, we can look forward to being disciplined or fired by the Border Patrol because we should have run away to hide and then maybe thrown objects at the deranged killer instead of taking action and stopping him with a firearm,” the union local’s website says.

Here’s the new border reality under Barack Obama:

And:

And:

Under Obama, illegal immigration is not a crime.

If an illegal immigrant shoots at a Border Patrol agent, it is not a crime.

If the Border Patrol agent returns fire – you know, not having ran away and hidden – THAT is a crime.

God … Damn … America…

And here’s the official response from Mexico:

I’m so ashamed.  Mind you, I could be even MORE ashamed; I could be a US Border Patrol agent trying to find a shrub to hide behind.

The Monty Python administration border policy has come to full fruition.  It’s the Ministry of Silly Walks applied to border security.  That’s the level of absurdity going on.

And it is all being done by a president who is willing to treasonously betray America in order to win the Hispanic vote.

Brian Terry was responsible for his own death.  He should have “evacuated the premises” and “found a place to hide.”  So it’s not Eric Holder’s fault just because he gave the Mexican drug cartel murderers the guns to shoot Officer Terry with.

Update, July 3, 2012:  Border Patrol officers have issued the following statement:

Telling law enforcement officers that in all instances they are to run away and hide from some thug while innocent victims are butchered is simply inexcusable and pathetic.”

.

Advertisements

Mitt Romeny Racks Up 47,000 Donations Totalling Over $4.6 Million In 24 Hours After ObamaCare Decision Announced

June 29, 2012

Maxine Waters said to the Tea Party, “Let’s get it on!”

Well, game on, you corrupt, dishonest hack.

Admiral Yamamoto was said to have made a frightening prediction for Japan even as all of his fleet was celebrating their apparently wild success at Pearl Harbor:

“I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve.”

Obama and Democrats most certainly have a moment of success that was handed to them by Bush-appointee John Roberts.  But history amply documents that many such apparent victories turn out to be slow-moving disasters for those who celebrate them.  Not only is the ObamaCare that can now only be overturned by Republicans still wildly unpopular – and most importantly, wildly unpopular with independents to the tune of a whopping 70 percent who wanted it repealed – but it is also now officially the largest tax on the middle class in American history.  And that torpedoes Obama’s primary campagin rhetoric to be the protector of the middle class.

Then there’s also this: ObamaCare just ignited the Romney base to white-hot anger and very terrible resolve:

Romney campaign donations hit $4.6 million following health care decision
In a brief televised statement following the decision, Romney vowed that his first priority upon entering the White House would be repealing the so-called Obamacare law.
By Kristen A. Lee / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Friday, June 29, 2012, 1:17 PM

President Obama may have won the health care battle at the Supreme Court, but Mitt Romney is claiming a victory in the money wars.

Since the court released its stunning 5-4 decision upholding Obama’s health care law Thursday morning, the Romney campaign has taken in a flood of donations from Republican supporters angry about the ruling.

Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul tweeted Friday that the campaign received more than 47,000 online donations totaling $4.6 million in the 24 hours since the ruling.

The surge in small donations indicates that the decision may be an effective weapon for Republicans to mobilize conservatives for the general election.

The Obama campaign is asserting that they took in even more.  The fact that they refused to produce any of their numbers to back those assertions up is evidence enough to refute their bogus claims.

In 2010 enraged Americans rose up in righteous outrage over the even-then wildly unpopular ObamaCare and gave Democrats a historic ass-kicking:

[Consider] the sheer extent of the disaster Obama led the Democrat Party into: this wasn’t the worst election drubbing since 1994; it was the worst election drubbing since 1938 (and since 1928 in the state legislatures).

We also took 11 governorships.

Here is the map of that 2010 ass-kicking (red = “Democrats SUCK!”):

Well, now ObamaCare is back on the table.  You are literally voting for your very lives, people.  Time to get really, really angry again.

And now Obama is a big-time major documented liar to go with being a narcissistic sociopath:

[ObamaCare is] the largest tax of the American middle class in the history of the Republic.

Obama is now a documented liar on his pledge to the middle class:

BARACK OBAMA: And I can make a firm pledge: under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase – not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.

Obama promised it over and over:

But let me perfectly clear, because I know you’ll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.

And:

I will cut taxes – cut taxes – for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.

And in interviews with former Democrat spin doctors turned mainstream media “journalsits” Obama responded to questions:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

Here’s more of the exchange with Stephanopoulos in which we can now saw with complete factual certainty that Barack Obama lied to the American people:

STEPHANOPOULOS: “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.

But Obama lied to you. It IS a tax increase. It is a supermassive tax increase, in fact. And now the middle class is burdened with the largest tax increase in American history and it won’t be single dimes, but lots and lots of dollars, that Americans will find themselves paying. Like everything this cynical, dishonest president does, it will be sneaky: it won’t be all that much in year one beginning AFTER the election in 2013, but it will be more in year two and quite a bit more in year three.

You just wait and see how much you are going to pay for this monstrosity as it increasingly starts to blow up as it gets implemented.

There is already a $17 TRILLION funding gap in this monstrosity. And you aint seen nothin’ yet. Not only the absolute number but even the rate of those without insurance has INCREASED since ObamaCare was passed. And ObamaCare has raised the cost of medicine; the average family is paying over $2,000 more in health insurance premiums in a number of states since ObamaCare was passed. And that was EXACTLY what was predicted as compared to what would have happened HAD OBAMACARE NOT EXISTED, according to the CBO. But now we’re finding that health premiums are increasing by as much as 1,112 percent. And the Supreme Court decision today will likely cause this escalating cost spike to shoot at an even higher trajectory into the stratosphere.

This is what you will be voting for in 2012: do you want the kind of government-controlled health care system in which hundreds of thousands of elderly patients are terminated every single year just to make bed-space available as the inefficient government system crashes into chaos?  To put it into parallel terms given the population differences, 130,000 British elderly citizens euthanized every year amounts to at least 687,000 elderly Americans terminated.

Do you want 160 death panels?

Vote for Romney.  Vote for your very own life and most certainly forn the lives of your parents and grandparents.

Why Did John Roberts Play Brutus In The Shakespearean Tragedy Of ObamaCare?

June 29, 2012

We even had key swing vote Anthony Kennedy on our side.

We had the opinion being written by BUSH’S pick for Supreme Court Justice.  It was in the bag for conservatives.

All over America – even in the WHITE HOUSE – people were looking at the decision and initially believing it was a 5-4 ruling against ObamaCare.  People read what Roberts in his majority opinion wrote about the the unconstitutionality of ObamaCare as it pertained to the Commerce Clause:

The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity. It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce. Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority.

And it seemed to everyone that the decision had been to strike ObamaCare down.  The majority opinion clearly states that ObamaCare is unconstitutional if the mandate derives from the Commerce Clause, as ObamaCare in fact did derive it’s authority.

When suddenly the worm turned.

Yes, the mandate, the very heart of ObamaCare, was ruled unconstitutional.  But John Roberts decided if he just rewrote the law to make the mandate a tax and the power deriving not from the Commerce Clause but from the power of Congress to tax, it would fix everything.

In the minority opinion that should have been a MAJORITY opinion given that all the conservative justices but that Bush-picked guy supported it along with Anthony Kennedy, the statement was:

[T]o say that the Individual Mandate merely imposes a tax is not to interpret the statute but to rewrite it. Judicial tax-writing is particularly troubling.

ObamaCare was NOT a tax.  We have Democrats and Obama on the record saying that all over the place and actively arguing with anybody who said it was a tax:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

Here’s more of the exchange with Stephanopoulos in which we can now saw with complete factual certainty that Barack Obama lied to the American people:

STEPHANOPOULOS: “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.

But Obama lied to you. It IS a tax increase.

And none other than Bush Justice John Roberts rewrote the law to “fundamentally transform” it to turn what was in every Democrat’s words NOT a tax increase (and therefore unconstitutional according to the decision yesterday) into a tax increase (and therefore “constitutional enough” for John Roberts).

John Roberts played the role of Brutus in being that sudden, surprise stab in the back.

Why in the hell would he do this?  Why would he abandon his conservative philosophy and betray not only conservatives but America itself?

Well, in a nutshell, here’s why:

Today Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) took to the Senate floor to warn his colleagues and President Obama about public comments about the Supreme Court as it deliberates the health care case.

“Attempts to manipulate or to bully the Supreme Court, especially during deliberations in a particular proceeding, are irresponsible and they tend to threaten the very fabric of our constitutional republic, ” Lee said during a floor speech.

Lee was responding in part to a speech in May by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Leahy took to the Senate floor to warn the Supreme Court, particularly Chief Justice John Roberts, not to strike down the Affordable Care Act.

Leahy said that when he attended oral arguments in March he “was struck by how little respect some of the Justices showed to Congress.” He said some of the justices seemed “dismissive” of the months of work—including dozens of hearings—on the part of both the House and the Senate to enact the law.

Leahy singled out Roberts, explaining why he had voted for him during the Chief Justice’s confirmation hearings: “I trusted he would act to fulfill his responsibilities in accordance with the testimony he gave to the United States Senate. I said then that if I thought he would easily reject precedent or use his position on the Supreme Court as a bulwark for activism, I would not have supported his confirmation.”

During a Rose Garden ceremony in April President Obama said, “Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, to his great personal disgrace, put the “reputation” of the Supreme Court ahead of the law, the Constitution, and the nation.

And he did so in the face of frankly terrorist threats to delegitimize the SCOTUS that Roberts – who was appointed directly to the role of Chief Justice by George W. Bush – loves more than anything.

Call it the Stockholm Syndrome, which amounts to the desire for a captive to please the terrorists in order to stay alive.

John Roberts, we are now told, almost certainly switched his vote.

We have never seen a president demonize the Supreme Court the way Barack Obama did when he started the terrorist-threat ball rolling.  George Bush was confronted with a decision that he came out and announced he disagreed with immediately before stating that he respected the Court and would follow the law.  Obama flat-out stated that if the Supreme Court overturned his ObamaCare, this “unelected body” would be exceeding its authority and would no longer be deemed legitimate.

Obama directly threatened the Supreme Court.  His terrorist bomb was the “extraordinary disruption” of Medicare that his “law” had already created and he would see turn into total chaos to punish America if ObamaCare wasn’t upheld.

There was the threat to implode the Medicare system, yes.  There was the demonization of the Supreme Court as an illegitimate body that was all over the place, yes (conservatives kept asking liberals, but what are you going to say if ObamaCare is upheld?).  That demonization was ALL over the place as every liberal crawled out to join in on the Supreme Court bashing in the days before the decision.

And John Roberts blinked.  He switched his vote to appease the demonic, rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth Democrat hate-machine that had been switched on by Barack Obama.

Everyterrorist will confidently tell you something: terrorism works.  That’s why we do it.

The narrative was as follows: John Roberts was troubled by the 2000 lawsuit in which the SCOTUS ultimately ruled that George Bush won the election and the left decried the Supreme Court as a politically biased institution.  And John Roberts listened to Barack Obama’s threat and his ugly words about the Court he loved, he listened to Democrats like Patrick Leahy and Charles Schumer, he listened to all the liberal punditry and he realized that the only way to save the reputation of the Supreme Court from charges of bias was to side with the liberals.

Now, interestingly, there was never any pressure on the four liberals to not rule in lockstep liberal fashion.  This idea of “bias” that was crafted by the left to demonize the SCOTUS doesn’t work that way; it only works against conservatives for ruling according to their conservative philosophy.  Liberals are free to be as biased and as political and as ideological and as partisan as they want.  So there was never any pressure whatsoever for the four liberal justices to ever rule in any other manner but according to their lockstep-liberalism.

Nope.  It was the five Republican-appointed Justices who had to cave.

We were told that a 5-4 decision against Obama would be dreadful.  But if there were to be a 5-4 decision FOR ObamaCare, well, “The highest Court in the land has spoken.”

So John Roberts “fixed” everything.  Just listen to the Democrats and the liberal media praising Roberts and the Court now???  And all he had to do was utterly abandon his conservative principles.  It’s that easy.  It’s just as easy for Republicans in the House and the Senate.  “Bi-partisan compromise” isn’t when 17 Democrats join Republicans in holding Obama Attorney General Holder in contempt; no.  It is when 3 Republicans join Democrats in passing the stimulus.

The Democrats demonized the Court as a political body, and that cut Roberts to the core so much that he was willing to do whatever it took to keep Democrats from politicizing the Court.  Even if it meant politicizing the Court by rewriting a law that his own decision argued was unconstitutional without rewriting the law (with said rewriting the statute being a very political thing to do).

If you want to see true politicizing of the Supreme Court – just as if you want to see ANYTHING evil in America, whether it be slavery, or the Ku Klux Klan, or re-segregation, or the resurgance of the Ku Klux Klan in the 20th Century under the banner of the Democrat Party, or racist union-imposed segregationism, or putting people in camps – you look at DEMOCRATS.  And what is so for everything else is so in the case of the politicization of the Supreme Court: FDR tried to pack the court with “yes men” judges when the Supreme Court told him much of his New Deal was unconstitutional.  And you throw in what the Democrat Party did to destroy Robert Bork and the “high-tech lynching” they demonized Clarence Thomas with, and you ought to get the picture.

Chris Matthews actually libeled John Roberts by comparing him to the judge who passed the fugitive slave act:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: You know, one other concern here, Ezra, a friend of mine, who is a fellow Roman Catholic said, he doesn’t want to be the second Roger Taney. Roger Taney, of course, was a Roman Catholic who upheld the Fugitive Slave Law back before the Civil War and was villainized throughout history because of that.

The Democrat Party overwhelmingly passed the fugitive slave act over Republican opposition.  It is frankly evil to so turn history on its head.  But since when did facts matter to liberal propagandists like Chris Matthews?

Terrorist Democrats had planted a bomb under the foundation of the Supreme Court of the United States.  Only by bowing down to the left could the SCOTUS be allowed to be viewed as “credible” or “legitimate.”  It only works one way.

I agree with the Democrats who say the Supreme Court is a purely political body.  Given that presidents pick the judges, how on earth could it be anything else?  And why should Republicans feel guilt over the fact that Republicans have held the highest elected office in the land than Democrats, such that they have an advantage in “picks”???

Why is it a travesty of justice if five Republican justices decide the law from their philosophy but it wouldn’t be a travesty of justice if five Democrat justices decided the law from their philosophy, apart from the very partisan bias that the left had been dumping on the Supreme Court in the months before Roberts caved?

Let me take this a little bit further, to the practical level: Republican presidents – including the hated George W. Bush – have appointed two of the justices who sided with liberals in monumental decisions like ObamaCare (President Ford appointed John Paul Stevens to go with John Roberts).  Oh, and perennial swing vote Anthony Kennedy was appointed by Reagan.  Consider that Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan will NEVER rule with the conservatives on a major issue.  They were in lock-fascist goose-step on ObamaCare.

If John Roberts ever wanted to be welcom at another hoity-toity Georgetown cocktail circuit soiree, well, he knew what he had to do (hint, hint: the same thing that Brutus knew he had to do to Caesar).  Because he would have been a poster boy for left wing contempt if he’d decided the way he apparently clearly had decided before caving into the intimidation of the left and changing his tune.  Now Roberts has miraculously been transformed from right-wing goon to hero (see also here for the same).

It only works one way, you see.

Like the horror of a 5-4 decision overturning ObamaCare, as NBC anchor David Gregory amply documents:

Early the 7 a.m. et hour of Today, Gregory melodramatically fretted over the possibility of ObamaCare being ruled unconstitutional: “What happens if it is struck down in part or in whole by a 5 to 4 decision? Would that not underscore how dysfunctional our government is, the major institutions of our government are? That is a real nightmare scenario, I think, for the political class in this country.”

Now a 5-4 decision is wonderful and healthy for the nation.  Now “the highest court in the land has spoken.”

What a million metric tons of manure.

Let’s just all agree with the Democrats the days before the ObamaCare decision.  The Supreme Court is nothing more than nine political hacks wearing weird black robes like evil priests of some strange god that has nothing to do with us.

The thing that most bothers me is that “justice” is very much working against conservatives.  And that is because the way the game is being played.  You’ve got the liberal “justices” who can do ANYTHING.  They can literally make up rights (such as “privacy”) to use those made up rights to then make up other rights (abortion).  And how did they justify abortion?  Did they find it in the Constitution?  Nope.  But they found – and this in their very own words – “penumbras and emanations” of abortion in there when they stared into the Constitution like a crystal ball.

What on earth do conservatives have to fight against penumbras and emanations?  We read the Constitution like it actually MEANS SOMETHING and seek the intent of the founding fathers who didn’t intend us to make up whatever we needed to make up to justify whatever the hell we want to do.

Maybe at some point we’ll have the rightwing equivalent of liberal justices who will use the ObamaCare verdict against liberals by forcing all Americans to buy Bibles or pay a “tax” and then force all Americans to go to church or pay a “tax” and then force all Americans to buy a gun or pay a “tax.”  Maybe we’ll have a rightwing president who will decide to arbitrarily abrogate the tax laws the way Obama abrogated immigration law and simply declare that he will not enforce the laws against any American who refuses to pay capital gains taxes.

The reason we’re going to ultimately lose this war for American culture is because in order to do things like this, we’d have to sacrifice our core principles.  Whereas the left have no such principles to sacrifice.

Again, principle is something that only works one way.

In the short run this could actually work out well for Republicans.  Remember, it was the rage of ObamaCare that prompted Americans to come out in droves and give the Republican Party the largest landslide win in history.  And now that issue is right back on the table.  The Supreme Court won’t save us; we must save ourselves from Obama and his tyranny in November.  And that was when ObamaCare was a mandate and not the largest tax in the history of the United States directly smacking the middle class.

The long run is another beast entirely.  America will lose in the long run.  Because too many critical things only work one way.  I’ve listed several above, but there are many other cancers, such as spending and debt.  They can only work one way – and that one way is taking us up like a rocketship until we come down in utter economic collapse.  This is because it is simply too easy for the left to demonize the right over ANY cut in spending.  If Republicans cut spending its because they’re greedy and want to protect the rich at the poor’s expense, etc. etc.  And Republicans will do the very same thing that John Roberts did and blink and then cave in the face of demonic attack.  And as a result America will never be able to cut spending enough to save itself.

The beast is coming.  The Bible tells us that this Antichrist will be a big government world leader who will literally be worshiped as he leads the world straight into hell.  Prior to these last few years, my major stumbling block in believing this was America; how could America do such a thing as worship the beast and take his mark? 

Those illusions have been utterly dispelled.  The beast will come.  When he does America will vote for him.  And then worship him.  And then take his mark.  And then burn in hell forever and ever.

The Socialist ObamaCare Takeover Of Health Care Is An Unmitigated Disaster. Just Ask Doctors.

June 28, 2012

I write this the night before the Supreme Court releases its decision on ObamaCare, obviously not knowing how the SCOTUS will rule.

Will the SCOTUS overturn the entire law?  I think so, in the sense that the Democrats who rammed the disgraceful takeover of our health care system could have placed a severability clause in it, but didn’t.  One of the Justices (Scalia, in my memory) famously asked just how on earth they could be expected to divide this 2,700 page monstrosity up if they were to decide to overturn part of it and keep part of it.

On the other hand, The Supreme Court seems to have a penchant for deciding as little as possible and ruling as narrowly as possible – which guarantees that the same issues will come before them again and again and again.  If you are a fan of the SCOTUS, you might argue that this is because they don’t want to involve the Court in important issues which ought to be decided by the elected branches.  But if that’s true, why bother to even take up these cases with decisions that decide almost nothing?  On the other hand, if you are a SCOTUS skeptic, you might well conclude that the Supreme Court never issues bold decisions so it can have job security.

The court issues so many narrow decisions that merely force them to issue subsequent narrow decisions on basically the same damn cases ad nauseam.

An example of this was the Arizona SB 1070 Law.  By keeping the major provision and overturning the other three, you ended up with a joke of a system in which the states get to demand immigration papers and the suspects get to refuse to show them their immigration papers.  Antonin Scalia’s frustration over the near-useless ruling which guarantees that immigration will remain a mess would have been funny if the situation wasn’t such a travesty.  His harshest remark may have been:

The President has said that the new program is “the right thing to do” in light of Congress’s failure to pass the Administration’s proposed revision of the immigration laws. Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so. But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of federal immigration law that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind.

So, while I am believing the Court will issue a bold decision and overturn ObamaCare simply because it will create a genuine disaster if it overturns the mandate (the funding mechanism) but leaves the rest of the law that forces trillions in spending intact – or even worse, leaving the mandate intact and choosing some other details to quibble over – I recognize that such a decision is how the SCOTUS normally does business.

A new survey that just came out that demonstrates just what a turd this ObamaCare law is worth broadcasting from every rooftop.  If ObamaCare gets thrown out as unconstitutional, then we need to keep doing everything we can to expose just how breathtakingly evil this demonic law truly was in the face of the Democrat Party’s “The Supreme Court is only a valid entity if it rules the way we fascist liberals say it should” mantra (see more of that here from elected Democrats).  And what the heck.  Here’s still more.  And we need to expose it even MORE if any part of this beast is allowed to limp out of the Supreme Court (and if the SCOTUS doesn’t overturn it, figure on the same people who demonized the Court saying, “The highest court in the land has now spoken …”).

So take a look at the following two surveys:

Thanks Obamacare: 83% of Doctors Surveyed Say They May Quit
Kate Hicks
Web Editor, Townhall.com 06/14/12

The Doctor Patient Medical Association has released a new survey of about 700 doctors, and the results are bleak. Scary bleak. Among other dismal figures, Doctors’ Attitudes on the Future of Medicine: What’s Wrong, Who’s to Blame, and What Will Fix It found that 83% of respondents are contemplating leaving the industry if Obamacare is fully implemented, owing to its disastrous projected consequences. Indeed, they openly blame the healthcare law for their industry’s woes:

KEY FINDINGS
 90% say the medical system is on the WRONG TRACK
 83% say they are thinking about QUITTING
 61% say the system challenges their ETHICS
 85% say the patient-physician relationship is in a TAILSPIN
 65% say GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT is most to blame for current problems
 72% say individual insurance mandate will NOT result in improved access care
 49% say they will STOP accepting Medicaid patients
 74% say they will STOP ACCEPTING Medicare patients, or leave Medicare completely
 52% say they would rather treat some Medicaid/Medicare patient for FREE
 57% give the AMA a FAILING GRADE representing them
 1 out of 3 doctors is HESITANT to voice their opinion
 2 out of 3 say they are JUST SQUEAKING BY OR IN THE RED financially
 95% say private practice is losing out to CORPORATE MEDICINE
 80% say DOCTORS/MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS are most likely to help solve things
 70% say REDUCING GOVERNMENT would be single best fix.
 
If this isn’t an airtight argument for the repeal of Obamacare, nothing is. When the people providing the actual healthcare are thinking of getting out of the game, the system is clearly broken. Here’s hoping the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare this month.

The other survey gives us more information on just how rancid physicians think ObamaCare is.

Some screenshots I took from the survey:

And:

So other than the fact that doctors will have less control over medical decisions while government bureaucrats will have far MORE control, and other than the fact that it’s going to escalate the process of driving doctors out of medicine when we ALREADY HAVE A DOCTOR SHORTAGE, ObamaCare is hunky dory.

Well, maybe not so hunky dory.  There’s a lot more crap wrong with this ObamaCare turd:

For Physicians, Obamacare a Net Negative
Posted on 15 June 2012 by jmorris
By Jeremy Morris, Associate Editor, US Daily Review.

Jackson & Coker, a division of Jackson Healthcare and leader in permanent and locum tenens physician staffing for over 30 years, endorsed the results of a new survey by its parent company that finds that a “D” is the mean grade physicians give the health law, despite its primary intention to reduce the cost of healthcare and provide coverage for the uninsured. Physicians who said they were very knowledgeable about the law were even more negative.

The survey was conducted online from May 25 to June 4, 2012. Invitations for the survey were emailed to physicians who had been placed by Jackson Healthcare staffing companies and those who had not. Respondents were self-selected, with 2,694 physicians completing the survey. (The error range for this survey at the 95-percent confidence level is +/- 1.9 percent.)

In addition, the survey shows 68 percent of American physicians disagree that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as “Obamacare,” will have a positive impact on physician/patient relationship.

Only 12 percent of physicians said the law provides needed healthcare reform. A majority of physicians said the ACA would not improve healthcare’s quality, rising costs or patients’ control over their own health care. They also said it would worsen the amount of control physicians have over their practice decisions.

The only positive rating physicians gave the ACA was related to access. Fifty-four percent of respondents said the new law will increase patients’ access to care. The health law is estimated to drive 13 million new Medicaid enrollees beginning in 2014.

“Physician opinions are important since they are a primary driver of healthcare decisions and costs,” said Richard L. Jackson, chairman and CEO of Jackson Healthcare, a national healthcare staffing company. “Overall, they believe the law does not meet its intended objectives, negatively impacts the patient-physician relationship and hinders their ability to control the treatment of their patients.”

One important provision in the law set to take effect next year is the Independent Payment Advisory Board charged with finding savings in Medicare. Sixty-four percent of physicians said it would have a negative impact on patient care.

Among other key survey findings:

  • 70 percent said ACA would not stem rising healthcare costs.
  • 66 percent said ACA would give physicians less control over their practice decisions.
  • 61 percent said ACA would not improve the quality of healthcare.
  • 55 percent said Congress should scrap ACA and start over.
  • 49 percent said ACA would give patients less control over their healthcare.
  • 35 percent said it did nothing to reform healthcare.
  • 31 percent said ACA didn’t go far enough and a single-payer system is needed.
  • 22 percent said ACA went too far and impedes a physician’s ability to practice medicine.

“Improving the quality of patient care and managing rising healthcare costs are undoubtedly the two biggest issues facing physician practices today, and this survey certainly indicates the new health law is doing little to address these key challenges,” said Tony Stajduhar, president of the Permanent Recruitment Division, Jackson & Coker. “With a shortage of physicians already projected in the coming years, especially among permanent physicians, we need to actively engage this key group in discussions regarding healthcare reform that will bring about impactful changes in our current healthcare system―in turn, positively influencing recruitment and retention within this profession.”

To view the survey or learn more click here.

According to a statement, “Jackson & Coker believes that all hospitals, clinics, physician practices, and patients should have access to a physician whether for a day, a lifetime, or any of life’s changes in between. For over three decades, Jackson & Coker has been uniting physicians and hospitals to ensure that all patients’ needs are met by providing physicians for as little as a day and as long as a lifetime. The firm specializes in doctor opportunities for physicians at any stage of their professional career. Headquartered in metro Atlanta, the physician recruitment firm has earned a reputation for placing exceptionally qualified candidates in commercial and government practice opportunities. Recruiters work in two divisions of the company: Permanent Placement, which places providers in over 40 medical specialties in permanent placement jobs, and locum tenens, a staffing model that recruits medical providers (physicians and CRNAs) for temporary vacancies. Jackson & Coker’s in-house client credentialing specialists perform comprehensive credentialing services that adhere to the highest industry standards, with a dedicated individual for each specialty team.”

The “Obama Akbar!” liberals who most support ObamaCare frankly don’t care if it is evil and will kill people by medical neglect.  In fact, the worse it is, and the more people die because of ObamaCare, the better – because that would lead to the next step in liberal’s most cherished dreams of a state-controlled society.  Because the sad, pathetic, tragic fact of the matter is that the bigger and more intrusive government becomes and the more wildly said government fails, the more essential still bigger and still more intrusive government becomes.  If a small, limited government that conservatives yearn for has a crisis, most people aren’t gravely impacted.  If you have the sort of giant government bureaucracy that liberals dream of and it has a crisis, people will suffer by the hundreds of millions.  If we had a catastrophic collapse of the government – and believe me, one is coming SOON – you can rest assured that millions of frightened, hungry people would demand the government step in and help them – which is precisely what liberals want.  The system crashes, liberals seize power, and they never look back.  And it won’t even MATTER that they were the ones who created the collapse in the first place.  We’ve already seen this story before.

Update, 6/28/12: Well I was wrong – and very right.  SCOTUS issued one of its quibbling decisions in which it played around with the regime’s draconian Medicaid threats against the states while asserting that the mandate was a tax even though Obama and the Democrat Party swore up one side and down the other that it was NOT a tax.  But overall, as long as you play bait-and-switch and arbitrarily declare what Obama and Congress said was not a tax to be a tax, it’s “constitutional.”  All the Supreme Court had to do to not be “activist” in Democrat demagoguery was to rewrite the clear intent of the law to use the Commerce Clause rather than Congress’ taxing powers.  Which of course is pretty damned activist, isn’t it?

It is also the largest tax of the American middle class in the history of the Republic.

Obama is now a documented liar on his pledge to the middle class:

BARACK OBAMA: And I can make a firm pledge: under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase – not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.

Obama promised it over and over:

But let me perfectly clear, because I know you’ll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people:  if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime.  I repeat: not one single dime.

And:

I will cut taxes – cut taxes – for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.

And in interviews with former Democrat spin doctors turned mainstream media “journalsits” Obama responded to questions:

STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

Here’s more of the exchange with Stephanopoulos in which we can now saw with complete factual certainty that Barack Obama lied to the American people:

STEPHANOPOULOS: “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.

But Obama lied to you.  It IS a tax increase.  It is a supermassive tax increase, in fact.  And now the middle class is burdened with the largest tax increase in American history and it won’t be single dimes, but lots and lots of dollars, that Americans will find themselves paying.  Like everything this cynical, dishonest president does, it will be sneaky: it won’t be all that much in year one beginning AFTER the election in 2013, but it will be more in year two and quite a bit more in year three.

You just wait and see how much you are going to pay for this monstrosity as it increasingly starts to blow up as it gets implemented.

There is already a $17 TRILLION funding gap in this monstrosity.  And you aint seen nothin’ yet.  Not only the absolute number but even the rate of those without insurance has INCREASED since ObamaCare was passed.  And ObamaCare has raised the cost of medicine; the average family is paying over $2,000 more in health insurance premiums in a number of states since ObamaCare was passed.  And that was EXACTLY what was predicted as compared to what would have happened HAD OBAMACARE NOT EXISTED, according to the CBO.  But now we’re finding that health premiums are increasing by as much as 1,112 percent.  And the Supreme Court decision today will likely cause this escalating cost spike to shoot at an even higher trajectory into the stratosphere.

Let me put this into the context of the Star Wars fight of good versus totalitarian big government-gone insane evil: “Help me, Mitty Won Romnobi.  You’re my only hope.”

Please use your presidential lightsaber to slice this Death Panel to pieces before it’s too late.

Obama Administration Turns Down Inexpensive And Successful Solution To Illegal Immigration Invasion Even When It Is Offered To Government FREE

June 27, 2012

This story ought to make you angry.

When we were trying to build the fence, Democrats – you know, the people who keep demonizing Republicans as “obstructionist” – blocked it at every turn and said it wouldn’t work.  And we were responding that it worked better than NOTHING.  Well, now there’s a REAL solution that is inexpensive and would literally be able to completely stop ALL illegal immigration dead if it were only implemented.

Well, now we know one thing: Democrats don’t WANT to stop illegal immigration.  Democrats WANT illegal immigration; they want as much illegal immigration as they can possibly get.  They want it because they have cynically and frankly treasonously concluded that they can exploit it politically.

High-Tech Solution to Border Problems Ignored
By Chuck Holton
CBN News Military Reporter
Tuesday, June 26, 2012

U.S.-MEXICO BORDER — Government spending to secure the United States’ southern border with Mexico has surged since 9/11 with mixed results.

The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is down, while drug smuggling has only gotten worse.
 
John Ladd works on the same Arizona ranch his family has owned since 1896. His 14,000-acre lot includes 10 miles along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Out there, you don’t have to look far to see the effects of illegal immigration.
 
“I’ve had a group of people, at least one group a day since Thanksgiving. I’ve been robbed, I’ve had them in the house,” Ladd told CBN News.
 
But migrant workers aren’t the real problem. What worries Ladd most is the drugs crossing onto his land.
 
“We’ve had five drive-thrus with 14 trucks total since February of this year,” he said.
 
According to government estimates, only about 15 percent of those illegally crossing the border are caught. And the fence isn’t making much of a difference.
 
“This has been a smugglers point for a hundred years. They cut the mesh out at the bottom and the side and across the top, and then they open it up and ramp over,” Ladd explained. “This is a little bit better than a seven strand barbed wire fence, but not much.”
 
Hi-Tech Possibilities
 
Arlington, Texas, is home of the Cowboys stadium, and one of the most technologically advanced municipalities in the country.

CBN News met a man there who developed the security system for the Super Bowl, and may also hold the key to securing the southern border.
 
“The fence is a wonderful tool if you want to stop wildlife, if you want to stop livestock, if you want to stop somebody for 30 seconds,” Dan Hammons, owner of Hammons Enterprises, explained.
 
“We think the border needs to be a line in the sand as opposed to a wide area,” he added.

“If a person crawls over that fence or crosses that border illegally, we have a wide array of sensing technologies that will set off an alarm and will turn on a camera on a node tower,” Hammons said. “So you can determine, is it a person, is it a deer, is it a cow.”
 
“With our system, I’m confident that we are going to detect 100 percent of the people crossing that border illegally,” he boldly claimed.
 
Key Benefits
 
Hammons’ system also costs about $1 million less per mile than a border fence. While there are already many cameras on the border, there is a major difference in this network: bandwidth.
 
“We don’t have to compress high-definition video. We can pump thousands of video streams thousands of miles, and you are looking at it in true real time,” Hammons explained.
 
“So it gives us the ability in a border environment to actually track somebody with a video camera all of the time for as far north as we want to go,” he said.
 
The objective is to give U.S. Border Patrol more accurate and timely information, which in turn keeps them safe.

“We’re going to add a layer of safety for these men and women that are on the border every day putting their lives at risk,” Hammons said. “We’re not going to send one person to apprehend a group of people armed with AK-47s.”
 
Ladd loves the idea because of the accuracy and timeliness that Hammons’ system could provide.
 
“Absolutely in favor of that technology, but yet we can’t seem to come to terms that that’s the way to do it,” Ladd said. “And so we depend on a 10-foot wall that an old woman can climb over with help.”
 
“On our ranch… the length of it, you could have one guy sitting at a computer module and he’d be able to monitor that whole 10-and-a-half miles. One person!” Ladd continued.
 
Government Cold Shoulder
 
Still, decision makers in Washington have repeatedly turned down Hammons’ ideas.
 
“They have shut the door in our face,” he said.

“We offered to do this for them for free. We wanted to build a three-mile section of it for free. No cost or obligation to the government, all we wanted was an operational evaluation,” Hammons recalled.
 
He hinted that the system’s potential may be viewed by some as a political problem.
 
“We’re going to be able to tell the truth about what’s going on on the border,” Hammons said. “We’re going to be able to show the American public exactly what is happening down there.”
 
In the meantime, ranchers along Arizona’s border feel like they’re stuck in a war zone.

“Regardless of what Homeland Security and Border Patrol says, the border isn’t as safe as it’s ever been,” Ladd said. “There’s more drugs coming right now than ever before.”
 
“A guy driving a Border Patrol truck up and down the fence isn’t going to cut it,” he added.

Watch the report here.

Senators John Kyl and John McCain of Arizona are both livid over Obama’s response to the Supreme Court verdict allowing police to question suspects about their illegal immigration status by refusing to allow the federal government to share immigration status dat with state law enforcement.  McCain rightly pointed out that it was the most childish behavior he had ever seen coming from a president.  And Kyl pointed out that the president’s reasoning for his executive dictates that amount to amnesty for all illegals other than those who had committed felonies (i.e. illegals can commit all the misdemeanors they WANT with impunity) were baseless by the administration’s own previous statements.  Obama is justifying his decisions on the premise that there are insufficient resources to remove illegal immigrants; but when the US Senate has told Obama they would increase federal border security resources if the government needed them, the administration has previously stated that they have all the resources they NEED to enforce the laws which require the federal government to act to remove ALL illegals.  As we speak, Obama is continuing this bogus charade: on the one hand he’s claiming resources are too scarce to follow the law which requires him to remove every illegal immigrant the system comes across; at the same time he is now claiming that he doesn’t need any help from the state of Arizona whatsoever.

And now we find out that Obama is trying to exploit illegal immigration and the misery and crime that follow from it in order to try to win re-election.

This is an administration that has compared illegal immigration to jaywalking.  This is an administration that views Obama as being above the law, as being a king who can abrogate the law and do whatever he pleases.

Barack Obama is merely a new variant of fascist.  Where Hitler exploited white Aryan racist policies to benefit politically, Obama is cynically exploiting black and Hispanic racist policies to benefit politically.  In a nation whose premise has been that it is a realm of laws in which justice is supposed to be blind to the race and to the political party of those who break it, this is a stab in the guts of everything our nation is supposed to be.

After Supreme Court Rules Arizona Law Immigration Checks Valid, Obama Orders Federal Government NOT To Accept Lawfully Arrested Illegal Immigrants

June 26, 2012

Barack Obama and Democrats had TWO FULL YEARS to pass legislation to legally deal with illegal immigration and the 12-20 million illegal immigrants who are “occupying” America.  Democrats not only had overwhelming control of the House of Representatives, but they even had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.  It was politically inconvenient for Obama and the Democrats to lift so much as a pinky finger to deal with the issue, so Barry Hussein broke his word to the Hispanic community and left them twisting in the wind.

The above is all 100 percent true.

Obama also told Hispanic organizations that he could not simply issue an executive order to enact the dream act by dictate.  How did he put it?

“The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”

That’s right.  Obama told them that such an executive order was “not how our system works” (i.e. it would be un-American for him to issue such an order).  He said it was “not how our democracy functions” (i.e. it would be anti-democratic to issue such an order).  And he said it was “not how our Constitution is written” (i.e. it would be unconstitutional for him to issue such an order). 

And then Obama did the very thing that he said would be un-American, anti-democratic and unconstitutional for him to do.  So when I point out the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is a fascist tyrant, I’m merely judging him by his very own criteria.

The thing about Obama is that only Obama matters to Obama.  The rest of you can burn for all he cares.  So when his election prospects started looking weak, well, it was suddenly time for Obama to pretend he gave a damn about Hispanics again. 

So the Supreme Court issues its decision yesterday on the Arizona Law.  It was kind of a wash: three components of the law were struck down, but the MAJOR provision of the law that allowed police to question those whom they reasonably suspected were illegally in the United States was maintained in a unanimous decision.  And many argue that provision that passed was the real guts of the law.

Well, as I pointed out, Barack Obama is a fascist.  He views himself like a king who is above the law, above the states, above the separation of powers and the rest of the Constitution, above the Congress and above the Supreme Court.  So what did he do?

As soon as the Supreme Court issued its ruling, Obama ordered Homeland Security to suspend all immigration agreements with the state of Arizona:

The Obama administration said Monday it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona police over enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.

Administration officials, speaking on condition they not be named, told reporters they expect to see an increase in the number of calls they get from Arizona police — but that won’t change President Obama’s decision to limit whom the government actually tries to detain and deport.

It amounts to a giant Obama middle finger to the Supreme Court and to the state of Arizona and every legal citizen of that state.

All Obama gives a flying damn about is demagoguing this issue to temporarily grab the Hispanic vote.  After that, he’ll screw them the moment it is to his advantage to do so.

Republican Senator Marco Rubio had been working to do the very thing that Obama imposed illegally by tyrannical dictate.  Had Senator Rubio been allowed to advance his legislation, Hispanics could have had their status by permanent legally enacted process:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama’s surprise decision to halt U.S. deportations of young illegal immigrants has all but killed a Republican effort to fashion legislation that could have won political points with Hispanic voters in November’s elections.

Republican Senators, including Marco Rubio, had been working behind the scenes for months on a bill that would have allowed some children of illegal immigrants a chance to stay in the United States legally while pursuing college or military careers.

But Obama’s announcement has effectively made the Rubio plan moot, further complicating Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s search for an immigration policy.

CNN contributor Ruben Navarrette wrote an article with the title “GOP version of DREAM Act holds promise.”  He pointed out that:

San Diego (CNN) — You may have heard that a group of Republicans in Congress — including GOP rock star and possible vice presidential pick Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida — are getting ready to introduce their version of the DREAM Act.You also may have heard that Democratic lawmakers and liberal advocacy groups despise the Republican alternative and derisively label it “DREAM Act Lite.”

As someone who has written about immigration for more than 20 years and hammered Democrats and Republicans (including Rubio) when appropriate, I call the GOP approach to the DREAM Act something else: A common sense solution. It could break a stalemate and improve millions of lives. And it could only be opposed for ugly partisan reasons.

Marco Rubio pointed out n an interview I saw on Fox News that his work had been demonized by Democrats – as echoed by Navarrette above.  And Rubio noted that when Obama imposed by executive tyranny basically the VERY SAME THING that Rubio’s legislation would have done legally and legislatively according to the Constitution, suddenly the same thing they’d demonized when it was a Republican’s idea was wonderful.

Democrats are that dishonest and that hypocritical.

Here’s what Obama pulled off – he stopped the legislative process to help Hispanics dead in its tracks just so he could exploit them:

No surprise here, as killing Sen. Marco Rubio’s proposed DREAM Act was exactly the point of Obama’s announcement on Friday. But it certainly is interesting that the same guy who took to the pages of Time today to urge Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform is the same guy who has been frantically working behind the scenes to spike Rubio’s legislation. Mission accomplished:

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said Monday that President Barack Obama’s move last week to block deportations for some young illegal immigrants in the U.S. has likely derailed his own similar efforts, at least until after the election.

“People are going to say to me, ‘Why are we going to need to do anything on this now. It has been dealt with. We can wait until after the election,’” Sen. Rubio said in an interview. “And it is going to be hard to argue against that.”

[…]

“The game changer here was Marco Rubio,’’ said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, one of a number of groups that has been pushing the White House on reform. “He was a legitimate conservative trying to find a solution to the broken immigration system … and the administration realized they had to do something.’’

So here’s Republicans trying to work within the system to do something that dishonest, lying Democrat demagogues dishonestly say Republicans won’t do.  And what happens?  The Fascist-in-Chief Obama stabs Marco Rubio in the back and kills an effort to help Hispanic kids in order to politically benefit in the short-term even though it is going to cost Hispanics in the longer term.  Nothing is going to happen now, thanks to Obama.

And just in case you don’t yet understand what a stinking pile of quivering slime Obama truly is, let’s go back to the way Obama just abandoned the entire state of Arizona and made sure that their illegal immigration crisis would fester and rot.  Arizona Senator John McCain, who at least has the virtue of being a grown-up, notes that Obama’s response is nothing short of the action of a spoiled child.  This is the condition Arizona is now in thanks to Obama: their own state is no longer theirs because now it belongs to Mexican drug cartel killers:

In Obama’s God Damn America, Armed Illegals Stalk U.S. Border Patrol – With Weapons Supplied By The Obama Administration.

If that isn’t enough, this state that is so overwhelmed by illegal immigration BY MURDERING DRUG GANGS that the federal government is literally posting sings that say, “This part of the state is simply off limits to American citiziens because Barack Obama benefits politically from refusing to enforce the law,” there’s an additional level of chutzpah.  The same day that the Supreme Court ruled in a way Obama didn’t like that gave Arizona the right to pursue illegal immigrants as they enter the Arizona police system, the same day Obama refused to allow Arizona to receive to have any information by ICE or Homeland Security to check the status of illegal immigrants, Obama essentially put a warrant out on any police officer in Arizona who in any way, shape or form tried to enforce the law that the Supreme Court just found constitutional.  Obama yesterday implemented a hotline for any illegal immigrant to complain about the way a police officer dared to question him/her.

Even Obama’s own city of Chicago is suffering terribly due to Obama’s policies.  Not that he gives a damn: he knows that liberals will continue to vote for him no matter what.

It is also now known to be a fact that inventive security experts have come up with an inexpensive way to guarantee border security – but Obama doesn’t WANT border security.  Obama literally WANTS more illegal immigration.

Obama will sell this nation out if it will help him get the Hispanic vote and get re-elected.

It is beyond amazing how genuinely evil this turd Obama truly is.

Barack Obama has this in common with Hitler: he has absolutely no decency whatsoever and ultimately every single group who keeps fighting for him is going to ultimately be betrayed.

Democrats Heckle Children And Tell Kids They Will ‘Burn In Hell’ For Singing ‘God Bless The USA’

June 25, 2012

Get lower than this.

At the 1:48 mark the black liberal repeatedly says to the children, “You’re going to burn in hell for this.  You’re going to burn in hell.”

This apparently took place at an event set up by a Republican Senate candidate in New York who was outraged over a school’s banning the singing of “God Bless the USA” by children.

Nothing makes a Democrat’s skin crawl like children singing about God when they should be shouting chants about corporations killing the earth or celebrating homosexuality.

These children should be singing about Obama.  HE’S the “messiah.”  Why don’t these children realize that Obama has replaced God?  Like these kids:

That little girl “gets it.” She’s got an altar set up right next to her and she’s singing her songs of praise and adoration in worship.

In both cases above – and in many, many other documented cases – children were indoctrinated to worship their messiah Obama BY NAME.

What were those kids singing at the event that makes the liberals come so completely unglued?  Were they singing songs adoring a man?  Nope.  Just God.  Just asking God – you know, GOD, not the deceitful weasel otherwise known as Obama – to bless their country.

To be a liberal is to be guilty of such stunning abject personal hypocrisy it is utterly beyond belief.

To be a liberal is to go so far over the top it is utterly unreal and then amazingly demonize conservatives for taking even the tiniest steps in the direction they themselves had already gone MILES.

This is why I long since concluded that you can’t “be reasonable” with Democrats; you simply have to defeat them.  Because they are pathologically incapable of not being stark raving HYPOCRITES.  And there is no possible way to have any kind of a reasonable discussion with fundamentally dishonest people.

Left’s War On Women Continues: Planned Parenthood In Public Schools Teaching 10-Year-Old Girls To Give Blowjobs – Then Accept Sodomy.

June 25, 2012

I know I’m getting old.  I know it because at this point I think I’ve seen everything.

I’ve been documenting the real “war on women.”  It is literally a war of extermination on women, in addition to hatred for women and the role they play as wives and as mothers:

Planned Parenthood’s War On Baby Women: Planned Parenthood Kills Girls Just Because They’re Girls While They Claim Their Opponents Are ‘Anti-Woman’

Former CNN Anchor BLASTS Obama For ‘War On Women’ And ‘Julia’ Campaigns And Says STOP CONDESCENDING TO WOMEN

Obama, The War-On-Women President, Slow-Jams On Jimmy Fallon Show To Same Band That Played ‘Lyin’ Ass Bitch’ When Michelle Bachmann Appeared As Guest

Liberals CONTINUE To Document That They Despise Housewives And Mothers

Democrats And Their War On Women

Obama And Democrat Party Want To Bring Sweden’s War On Parents By Government Takeover On America

Obama ‘Boy’s Club’ White House A Hostile Work Place Against Women (Obama Pays Women SIGNIFICANTLY Less Than Men)

Here’s a new front: teaching little girls to be big whores to sexually satisfy however many men wish to use them in a manner that won’t end up creating a hated baby:

School Uses Planned Parenthood Curriculum to Teach Kids Oral Sex
by Rita Diller | Olympia, WA | LifeNews.com | 6/20/12 4:19 PM

Parents could tell something was wrong with the children when they came home from school. They were quiet and withdrawn, embarrassed, and didn’t want to talk about what had happened. When Curtis and Jean Pannkuk began questioning their young daughter, they discovered that her elementary school principal had instructed her that day in how to perform oral and anal sex. The traumatizing instruction was delivered as a part of state approved sex education that was orchestrated, developed, pushed, and policed by Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice Washington, SIECUS, and a host of other agencies.

Though parents in the small town of Onalaska, Washington, are furious that their children have been violated and traumatized by the highly inappropriate sex instruction, the superintendent defended the principal’s delivery of graphic instruction in aberrant sex to the elementary school students, telling local media, “I think the principal handled it appropriately at the time; she only gave factual information, no demonstrations.” In another interview, he indicated that she “stuck to the curriculum.”

Curtis Pannkuk says if that’s the case, the curriculum needs to change. In an interview with Fox Radio News, Pannkuk said, “One of the other parents said it well—they raped the minds of the ten-year-old, eleven-year-old kids.”

Planned Parenthood’s influence in state-approved and state-mandated sexuality education is taking a ghastly toll on children. Onalaska parent James Gilliland expressed anger and dismay after his daughter’s innocence was stripped from her by the oral sex instruction. His wife, Kadra, said, “I was just shocked because I trusted my little country school. I trusted my school—that’s the bottom line, and they crossed the line.”

And that is exactly what Planned Parenthood relies upon when pushing its agenda through coalitions on the national, state, and district levels. Planned Parenthood operatives know that parents are busy with their lives and often trust their schools to do the right thing for their children. That creates the perfect opportunity for Planned Parenthood to enter the schools while parents are not paying attention, with all the wrong things for children.

Everyone is focused on Planned Parenthood and the evil it does through abortion. That evil is the ultimate child abuse and certainly renders the abortion giant unworthy of one penny of government funding. But even if Planned Parenthood never committed another abortion, the impact of its sex indoctrination programs on children, teens, and young adults is reason enough to strip it of government funding and run it out of the nation.

Visit our Defund Planned Parenthood action center and watch our ALL video report “Hooking Kids on Sex.” Then visit http://www.stopp.org to find out how to run Planned Parenthood out of your schools and out of your community. To book one of our expert speakers, contact msedlak@all.org.

Read Planned Parenthood is behind King County schools’ sex education for more information on Planned Parenthood’s intricate, not-so-well-hidden puppet-mastery of the HIV and sexuality education program in place in the King County, Washington, school that led to the forcible invasion of these children’s right to sexual innocence.

The curriculum in use in the King County, Washington, school where children in fifth grade were recently taught how to have oral and anal sex, is the Family Life and Sexual Health (F.L.A.S.H.) state-approved curriculum. Planned Parenthood is particularly enamored with this curriculum, highly recommending it on its website, alongside lesson plans from the SIECUS Sex Ed Library. (Dr. Mary Calderone, a former medical director at Planned Parenthood, was the first director of SIECUS.)

The state of Washington OSPI (Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction)—the agency that approves sex education programs for use in schools—recommends the Rutger’s-based Answer in its flyer as the resource for teacher training and staff development for state mandated HIV and state approved sexual health education. Answer is also recommended on the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood website, which goes on to say, “Teachers can earn professional credits from the ETR Associates Resource Center for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention (ReCAPP).” (ETR Associates began its corporate life as the Education Department of the Santa Cruz Chapter of Planned Parenthood.)

Answer promotes a Teen-to-Teen Sexuality Education Initiative called Sex, Etc. It offers the usual Planned Parenthood fare, including links to Planned Parenthood websites, advice on how to skirt parents, immoral sexual advice, abortion rights information, gay rights information, and instructions on how to have gay sex. Its website features a video claiming that when it comes to sex, “parents obviously don’t have the answers, and teenagers still need them. That’s where honest sex ed comes in.”

And who do you think might be training the teachers who are teaching the F.L.A.S.H. curriculum? A visit to Answer’s TISHE 2.0 (In-Service Training) Core Staff 2012 page features Mark Huffman, who just happens to be a former vice president for education and training at Planned Parenthood of Middle and East Tennessee. Also on staff is another former PP employee, Kurt Conklin, who is now the director of programs at SIECUS.

Additionally on staff is Nora Gelperin, recognized for her experience in training teachers nationwide in 2010. She received the Mary Lee Tatum Award from, that’s right, the Association of Planned Parenthood Leaders in Education. You might say she wrote the Answer book, in that “she developed Answer’s three dynamic online workshops ‘Sexuality ABCs (Abstinence, Birth Control and Condoms),’ ‘STD Basics’ and most recently ‘LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning) Issues in School.’”

Current Planned Parenthood employee Maureen Kelly rounds out the list of presenters. She is VP for programming and communications with Planned Parenthood of the Southern Finger Lakes. She also served for nine years on the SIECUS board of directors. “Kelly is the proud founder of Planned Parenthood’s Out for Health: LGBT Health & Wellness program.” Only two out of the six TISHE presenters do not list a current or past association with Planned Parenthood.

The TISHE 2.0 in-service teacher-training program is co-sponsored by SIECUS and Answer.

Planned Parenthood goes to great lengths to hide from parents its dominant position in school sex ed programming, but a few hours on the Internet reveals an extremely intricately woven web of deceit composed of organizations that spring from or are otherwise closely connected to Planned Parenthood. Those organizations and individuals are actually working with Planned Parenthood to call the shots when it comes to school-based sex education.

LifeNews.com Note: Rita Diller is the national director of American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood Project.

The more evil the left becomes, the more depraved our kids become.  Which in turn the left cites as justification for instilling still MORE evil.  And the vicious cycle just keeps getting more vicious.

In the Indian state of Punjab, there are 300 girls born for every 1,000 boys.  And you can thank abortion, liberalism and the Democrat Party for championing this extermination of womens in the name of “the right to choose.”

Men don’t bother to stick with women any more.  Abortion and the liberal Democrat justification for abortion has determined that men can’t really be “fathers” of anything other than non-human lumps of goop.  Further, liberal Democrats teach that men should have absolutely ZERO to do with whether babies live or die.  Which means they are completely expendable as “fathers” and really shouldn’t bother to stick around.  Democrats have done a fantastic job teaching men to abandon women and to abandon their role as fathers.

Now liberals are teaching women to shut up and start sucking.  And when they’ve finished doing that, they can stay shut up and bend over so there won’t be any babies.

It started when liberals taught us that oral sex wasn’t really “sex” to justify what Bill Clinton did clearly couldn’t be “sexual” when he had his intern giving him blow jobs in the Oval Office.  Now the left has added the new twist of teaching it in public schools to go along with accepting sodomy.

And that from the movement that continually tells us how “pro-woman” they are.

Like I said; I’m officially old.  Because I’ve seen everything.

Egypt’s New President (Congratulated By Obama): ‘The Capital Of The Caliphate Will Be Jerusalem, God Willing’

June 25, 2012

Well, there’s that “The capital of the caliphate will be Jerusalem, God willing” thing and then there’s Mursi’s “Jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal.”  And in honor of Mursi’s “democratic victory,” You get to vote which is worse.

Barack Obama, the president of God damn America, wanted to congratulate the Islamist candidate of the terrorist group called The Muslim Brotherhood for taking over the country yesterday.

It turns out that Mursi, the terrorists, and the Muslim Brotherhood ought to be grateful to Obama.  After all, Obama was instrumental in pushing American- and Israeli-ally Mubarak out to create the vacuum the terrorists could fill.  Like so many other evil things, it took Obama for evil to be able to say, “Yes, we can!”

I’m sure he wanted to congratulate the Brotherhood for it’s many successful acts of rape, too.

Egypt Islamist vows global caliphate in Jerusalem
By OREN KESSLER
05/08/2012 01:27
“The capital of the United States of the Arabs will be Jerusalem,” preacher tells thousands at Brotherhood rally.

Safwat Higazi speaking to supporters in Cairo Photo: YouTube

Egypt’s Islamists aim to install a global Islamic caliphate with its capital in Jerusalem, a radical Muslim preacher told thousands of Muslim Brotherhood supporters in a clip released Monday.

“We can see how the dream of the Islamic caliphate is being realized, God willing, by Dr. Mohamed Mursi,” Safwat Higazi told thousands of Brotherhood supporters at a Cairo soccer stadium as Mursi – the movement’s presidential candidate – and other Brotherhood officials nodded in agreement.

“The capital of the caliphate – the capital of the United States of the Arabs – will be Jerusalem, God willing,” Higazi said. “Our capital shall not be in Cairo, Mecca or Medina,” he said, before leading the crowd in chants of “Millions of martyrs march toward Jerusalem.”

Higazi is an unaffiliated Islamist who is barred from the United Kingdom for making statements endorsing terror attacks against Israelis. The clip, from Egypt’s Islamist-oriented Al-Nas television station, was aired last week and uploaded to YouTube on Monday by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

Members of the crowd carried banners emblazoned with slogans related to next week’s “Nakba Day,” when Palestinians and other Arabs mourn Israel’s creation in 1948.

“Tomorrow, Mursi will liberate Gaza,” an unidentified man cheers in the video before leading the crowd in chants of “Allah Akbar.”

“Banish the sleep from the eyes of all Jews,” the man repeats, accompanied by drumming. “Come on, you lovers of martyrdom, you are all Hamas… Forget about the whole world, forget about conferences. Brandish your weapons, say your prayers and pray to the Lord.”

Returning to the stage, Mursi vowed to pray in Jerusalem. “Yes, Jerusalem is our goal. We shall pray in Jerusalem, or die as martyrs on its threshold.”

Raymond Stock, an American translator and academic who spent two decades in Egypt, said the clip should come as a surprise to no one.

“This is what the Muslim Brotherhood really stands for: the extermination of Israel – and Jews everywhere – as well as the spread and control of radical Islam over the world,” he told The Jerusalem Post.

“How anyone can fail to see this boggles the mind – yet its denial is virtual dogma in the global mainstream media, US government and Western academia today,” said Stock, who has translated a number of books by the Nobel Prize-winning Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz.

The Brotherhood won about half of Egypt’s parliamentary seats, but its main candidate Khairat al-Shater was disqualified last month from running for president and Mursi has struggled to win wide support.

Hard-line Salafi Islamists were parliamentary elections’ biggest surprise, taking around 25% of seats.

Instead, the two front-runners are Abdel Moneim Abol Fotouh – a former Brotherhood figure who has won the backing of a broad range of voters from liberals to Salafis – and Amr Moussa, a former foreign minister and Arab League chief.

A presidential election, which starts on May 23-24, will choose a replacement for Hosni Mubarak, who was toppled in February last year.

Poll numbers released Monday by the state-run Al-Ahram Center show Moussa leading the field with 39%, followed by Abol Fotouh with 24%, former Mubarak premier Ahmed Shafiq with 17% and Mursi in fourth with just 7%.

Stock said Amr Moussa has a significant chance of replacing Mubarak.

“Many people want Islamist values but are afraid that Islamist control of the presidency in addition to parliament could be bad for tourism and foreign investment. Others simply like Moussa,” he said. “He is a radical nationalist with a pragmatic streak, and from a Western point of view is the best we can hope for now that Omar Suleiman has been excluded.”

“But we can’t rule out Mohamed Mursi yet – the Brotherhood machine is extremely formidable, and nearly everyone has underestimated them before,” he said, adding that “the Salafis remain wild cards, as ever.”

Obama is a reckless and feckless fool.  He assured us that the Muslim Brotherhood would not dominate the political chaos that he himself fomented and actually even claimed credit for.

And now because of the most pathetic and most evil president in American history, we’ve got a president in Egypt claiming Jerusalem for the Islamic caliphate.  Which is another way of saying because of Obama, we will have Armageddon.

God damn America, indeed, Rev. Wright.  As Obama’s reverend and spiritual mentor for 23 years, you spoke as a prophet in telling us that the days that God would bless America were over.

The beast is coming.

P.S. Glenn Beck got a chance to openly mock the New York Times for its previous utter ridicule of him when he predicted that Egypt would end up in the Muslim Brotherhood’s win column a year and a half ago.  Sean Hannity nailed this one, too.  And conservatives knew this would happen from George Bush’s failed experiement with “democracy” in the Palestinian Authority – you know, the corrupt terrorist cesspool that ended up going to terrorist group Hamas.  We predicted this would happen.  But liberals are immune to history, immune to facts and immune to reality.  For them it was “The Arab Spring is wonderful!  You can smell the freedom in the air!  Praise Obama!  Praise him!  Peace and unicorns float all around us!”  And we were right and now the only thing stopping a total descent into terrorist hell and Armageddon for Egypt is the Western-trained military.

Coming To America (Thanks, Obama!): Spain On Verge Of Collapse While Liberals Turn Violent In Streets

June 23, 2012

The OWS (“Occupy”) Movement pretty much proves it: this is liberalism on failure:

Spain’s economy on the edge of collapse as protests turn violent
By Hugo Duncan
PUBLISHED: 19:38 EST, 19 June 2012 | UPDATED: 01:49 EST, 20 June 2012

Europe plunged deeper into crisis last night as Spain lurched closer to needing a full-blown bailout to save it from collapse.

The government in Madrid was forced to pay prohibitively high interest rates to borrow money on another bruising day for the single currency bloc.

It raised fears that Spain is on the verge of becoming the biggest victim of the euro crisis so far – following the bailouts of Greece, Ireland and Portugal.

 

A coal miner sets fire to a barricade made of tires during a protest against government cuts in Villafranca del Bierzo, Leon, North-eastern SpainA coal miner sets fire to a barricade made of tires during a protest against government cuts in Villafranca del Bierzo, Leon, North-eastern Spain

The country – the fourth biggest economy in the eurozone – is back in recession and unemployment is at 25 per cent with half of young workers unable to find a job.

And the problems on the stock markets were matched on the streets.

Striking Spanish coal miners armed with homemade rockets, slingshots and rocks clashed with police firing rubber bullets yesterday.

They drove officers out of the town of Cirena in northern Spain in protest at government mining subsidy cuts that could devastate their industry.

Analysts warned that the situation was ‘critical’ for both Madrid and the eurozone despite the £80 billion lifeline thrown to the Spanish banking system last week.

Nicolas Spiro, a government debt expert at Spiro Sovereign Strategy, said: ‘We are in a critical situation now. This is the Rubicon that should have never been crossed.

‘It should have never come to this. We are dealing with a broken government bond market in Spain and quite possibly in Italy. This is exactly where you did not want the cancer to spread.’

 

Striking Spanish miners fire homemade rockets towards Spanish Civil Guards in Cinera, near Oviedo, northern Spain, during a mass strike against subsidy cuts that they claim threaten tens of thousands of jobsStriking Spanish miners fire homemade rockets towards Spanish Civil Guards in Cinera, near Oviedo, northern Spain, during a mass strike against subsidy cuts that they claim threaten tens of thousands of jobs

Spain had to pay an interest rate of 5.07 per cent to sell 12-month debt yesterday – up from 2.99 per cent a month ago and the highest level since the euro was launched in 1999.

The crucial 10-year bond yield was also above 7 per cent – a psychologically important level which proved to be the point of no return for Greece, Ireland and Portugal.

Marc Otswald, an analyst at City firm Monument Securities, said Spanish borrowing costs could lead to a full-blown bailout worth around £250 billion.

‘It is becoming very difficult to see how it can manage without that beyond the end of September unless yields fall dramatically,’ he said.

Ishaq Siddiqi, a market strategist at trading firm ETX Capital, said: ‘The sustained high yields on Spanish bonds remain a considerable concern for markets.

If the Spanish government fails to address the country’s economic crisis, like Greece, sky high borrowing rates could eventually force Spain into a full sovereign bailout.

A Spanish bailout would mark a disastrous escalation of the euro crisis, threatening Italy and core eurozone nations such as France and even powerhouse Germany.’

Obama is trying to make America more and more like Spain even as Spain is beyond obviously going to collapse into ruins.

Kind of makes you wonder what kind of demon-possessed people voted for this turd.

The same people – LEFTISTS (AKA “liberals”) – who are rioting in Europe are rioting in America as the Occupy fascists show us that violence invariably comes from the left.

Obama and the Democrat Party want for America EXACTLY what liberals in Spain created there.