Impeach Obama to Stop Socialist Takeover
Jeffrey T. Kuhner, Washington Times
President Obama has engaged in numerous high crimes and misdemeanors. The Democratic majority in Congress is in peril as Americans reject his agenda. Yet more must be done: Mr. Obama should be impeached.
He is slowly – piece by painful piece – erecting a socialist dictatorship. We are not there – yet. But he is putting America on that dangerous path. He is undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances; subverting democratic procedures and the rule of law; presiding over a corrupt, gangster regime; and assaulting the very pillars of traditional capitalism. Like Venezuela’s leftist strongman, Hugo Chavez, Mr. Obama is bent on imposing a revolution from above – one that is polarizing America along racial, political and ideological lines. Mr. Obama is the most divisive president since Richard Nixon. His policies are Balkanizing the country. It’s time for him to go.
He has abused his office and violated his oath to uphold the Constitution. His health care overhaul was rammed through Congress. It was – and remains – opposed by a majority of the people. It could only be passed through bribery and political intimidation. The Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the $5 billion Medicaid set-aside for Florida Sen. Bill Nelson – taxpayer money was used as a virtual slush fund to buy swing votes. Moreover, the law is blatantly unconstitutional: The federal government does not have the right to coerce every citizen to purchase a good or service. This is not in the Constitution, and it represents an unprecedented expansion of power.
Yet Obamacare’s most pernicious aspect is its federal funding of abortion. Pro-lifers are now compelled to have their tax dollars used to subsidize insurance plans that allow for the murder of unborn children. This is more than state-sanctioned infanticide. It violates the conscience rights of religious citizens. Traditionalists – evangelicals, Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, Orthodox Jews – have been made complicit in an abomination that goes against their deepest religious values. As the law is implemented (as in Pennsylvania) the consequences of the abortion provisions will become increasingly apparent. The result will be a cultural civil war. Pro-lifers will become deeply alienated from society; among many, a secession of the heart is taking place.
Mr. Obama is waging a frontal assault on property rights. The BP oil spill is a case in point. BP clearly is responsible for the spill and its massive economic and environmental damage to the Gulf. There is a legal process for claims to be adjudicated, but Mr. Obama has behaved more like Mr. Chavez or Russia’s Vladimir Putin: He has bullied BP into setting up a $20 billion compensation fund administered by an Obama appointee. In other words, the assets of a private company are to be raided to serve a political agenda. Billions will be dispensed arbitrarily in compensation to oil-spill victims – much of it to Democratic constituents. This is cronyism and creeping authoritarianism.
Mr. Obama’s multicultural socialism seeks to eradicate traditional America. He has created a command-and-control health care system. He has essentially nationalized the big banks, the financial sector, the automakers and the student loan industry. He next wants to pass “cap-and-trade,” which would bring industry and manufacturing under the heel of big government. The state is intervening in every aspect of American life – beyond its constitutionally delegated bounds. Under Mr. Obama, the Constitution has become a meaningless scrap of paper.
To provide the shock troops for his socialist takeover, Mr. Obama calls for “comprehensive immigration reform” – granting amnesty to 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens. This would forge a permanent Democratic electoral majority. It would sound the death knell for our national sovereignty. Amnesty rewards lawlessness and criminal behavior; it signifies the surrender of our porous southern border to a massive illegal invasion. It means the death of American nationhood. We will no longer be a country, but the colony of a global socialist empire.
Video of the Day: Joe Friday Schools Eric Holder about Arizona
H/T: The Blaze
Obama Claims Stealth Amnesty Has Secured Our Borders
Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports
The Obama administration is in overdrive to claim credit for a newly released report showing a decline in the number of illegal immigrants. The Pew Hispanic Center found that “only” 300,000 illegal immigrants entered the United States each year from March 2007 to March 2009. Since Obama took office in late January 2009, how he deserves credit is a mystery to everyone except The One. The fact is, George W. Bush does not deserve (much) credit, either. The report credits two developments with the slowing of the border invasion: greater enforcement of the law — begun by Bush to get support for an amnesty program — and something vastly more significant, the econoic downturn. With jobs scarce, there were fewer “jobs Americans won’t do.” The Pew study states this made many illegals already in the United States leave and fewer not yet here come. It also points out Texas, one of the strongest states economically, has seen virtually no decline.
If Obama is claiming credit for tanking the U.S. economy with his massive debt and ever-expanding social spending programs, we’re happy to let him.
It’s petty to claim credit for Bush administration successes, although Obama is by no means averse to that. Department of Homeland Security deputy press secretary Matt Chandler said, “This administration’s unprecedented commitment of manpower, technology and infrastructure to the Southwest border has been a major factor in this dramatic drop in illegal crossings.”
Obama’s border program has been a disaster for the entire country, most especially border states like Arizona. In essence, he waved the white flag before the narcotics gangsters waging a low-scale war on the border, posting signs 100 miles from the border to scare away…American citizens. Southern Arizona is occupied territory. The signs may as well read, “Abandon HOPE, all ye who enter here.”
His drive to give amnesty to a largely Democratic voting base has weakened our already permeable border. He has dismissed lawsuits against illegal immigrants. He has sued the state of Arizona over its common sense immigration law, even hauling the state before human rights abusers at the UN.
Today, the Justice Department sued Sheriff Joe Arpaio yet again, as it had threatened to do, allegedly because he is not cooperating with their investigation. The problem, according to Arpaio’s attorney, is….
Mr. President, If You Support the Troops, Help Them Vote
Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports
One of the president’s aims in his address last night was to clean up his image as the community-organizer-in-chief, the president who refuses to wear a flag pin on his lapel or put his hand over his heart for the national anthem. He attempted to boost his patriotism by rhetorically hitching himself to George W. Bush In his address last night, Barack Obama said:
This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It’s well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one can doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security. As I’ve said, there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation for our servicemen and women, and our hopes for Iraqis’ future. (Emphasis in original.)
The emphasis was deliberate. Obama intended to put himself on the same level as President Bush, who regularly got misty in the presence of the military and sobbed openly with those who had lost family members. Obama’s speech made it sound as though Bush’s patriotism were being questioned.
Left-wingers display unmatched outrage when they believe anyone “questions” their patriotism. (They spend the rest of their time telling us how much America sucks.) If President Obama wants to enjoy the respect of patriotic Americans, he should do it the old fashioned way: he should earn it.
Even as this is being written, thousands of military men are threatened with being disenfranchised in the midterm elections. And the Obama administration seems to be going out of its way to make sure their votes do not count.
Video of the Day: AZ Sheriff, “I Have About As Much Regard for the UN As I Do Vermin”
We were the first news outlet to report the Obama administration’s decision to take Arizona before the UN Human Rights Council. CNSNews.com Penny Starr interviewed Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County, Arizona, about the development; his fearless comments are below. As UN bureaucrats from foreign nations — some of them human rights abusers — judge the people of Arizona, lawmen like Dever, Joe Arpaio, Paul Babeu, and countless others whose names we will never know fight to keep Arizona safe from a crime epidemic. For a brief glimpse of how bad things are, watch our previous video of the day about conditions in Cochise County: “A Day on the Border.”
Obama Wants Arizona Judged by Human Rights Offender
Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports
If the Obama administration has its way, Arizona’s immigration law will be evaluated by a nation the State Department considers a human rights abuser.
Barack Obama included a reference to the Arizona law in America’s first-ever report to the UN Human Rights Council earlier this month. On November 5, a troika of nations composed of Japan, France, and Cameroon will hear the case against the United States and suggest a plan of action for the administration to follow before its re-evaluation in four years. However, the State Department records that Cameroon is guilty of numerous human rights violations including torture, suppression of the press, child labor, and female genital mutilation.
The State Department’s 2009 Human Rights Report on Cameroon records the African nation’s violent history:
Video: AZ Gov Learned of UN Report from Us
It’s not bad enough the Obama administration has hauled Arizona before the United Nations “Human Rights Council” for its overwhelmingly popular immigration law. Last night, Governor Jan Brewer told Greta Van Susteren the administration did not have the decency to tell her the state’s lawmakers had been put on the same level as Cuban jailers and North Korean torturers. Instead, Brewer said she learned about the lawsuit “on the internet.”
Since we broke the story, that means ultimately she learned about it from us. This development means two things.
How Many Deaths Before Obama Takes Border Security Seriously?
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, Floyd Reports
The shocking discovery of 72 murdered Hispanic migrants on a ranch just south of the U.S. border should be a wakeup call to all Americans that the security of our beloved nation begins at home.
Here in Arizona we have seen firsthand the bloody consequences of the crime and violence being imported by criminal aliens across our borders. Peaceful Phoenix has been transformed into the kidnapping capital of America.
A cadre of dedicated state and local officials has attempted to quell the violence. The result has been to watch these local leaders be sued, investigated, and harassed by the police powers of the Obama administration.
When will this insanity end?
The migration of farm workers in the 1950s and 60s was transformed into a migration of construction workers, maids and restaurant workers in the 1970s and 80s. But the character of the immigration has changed again, and we ignore these changes at our peril.
Criminal gangs now control the border. Drugs, human trafficking, robbery, extortion and smuggling are profitable motivators escalating violence on both sides of the border.
Until the borderlands of the American Southwest are policed and under the control of authorities, these inexplicably brutal conditions will persist. The drug cartels must be destroyed, and the only way to accomplish this is with serious intervention, manpower and high-tech weaponry.
Obama and his minions ignore the brutality, the pain, the suffering, and the long-term consequences of allowing these gangs safe haven in the hopes of scoring political points with immigrant voters.
This issue isn’t about the civil rights of migrants — this issue is about keeping all Americans safe regardless of nation of origin.
This massacre only came to light because a wounded Ecuadorean escaped. With a bullet wound in his neck he struggled to a nearby highway to find a Mexican military roadblock. He told authorities that the migrants’ abductors identified themselves as Zetas. Zetas are a drug gang whose control of parts of Mexico is so brutal even many Mexicans avoid traveling on public highways near their territory.
Amnesty International has called the plight of the migrants crossing from Mexico to the U.S. a major world crisis. Their report called our border “one of the most dangerous in the world,” and said every year an untold number of migrants disappear without a trace.
Mass unmarked graves near the border hold the key to a complete accounting of these horrors.
Now Mexican authorities are trying to determine whether the 72 victims in Tamaulipas were killed at the same time — and why. We may never know.
The future is becoming clear. If the United States doesn’t reverse course and begin to take border security seriously then these gangs will slowly increase their power in the U.S. They are already said to control several U.S. prisons, and neighborhoods in Phoenix and Los Angeles.
The Obama administration’s harassment of local and state officials attempting to secure the border must end immediately. Instead, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security should be assisting these duly-elected local officials in the difficult task. Everyone must work together.
Violence must be met with the swift hand of justice. If we use fences, armed drones, and patrols to secure the border of Iraq, we need to use that same technology and knowhow on our own border.
The primary objective of the United States government is to protect our citizens from foreign enemies. These criminal gangs are foreign enemies in every sense.
Barack Nagin’s War on Terror
Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports
The media have already begun cranking up coverage of this weekend’s fifth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. That event marked the first serious deterioration of public support for George W. Bush, although New Orleans’ Ray Nagin was the mayor who failed his city and left his population stranded while school buses went unused. The media made sure Bush got the blame, and a year later, combined with increasing sectarian violence in Iraq and a handful of House corruption scandals (some since dismissed), that would hand the Democrats control of Congress. The retrospective is the media’s way of celebrating their victory.
We should not forget we’re also closing in on another anniversary: it has been nearly 10 years since the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. Terrorists blew a hole in the side of the ship and killed 17 sailors just off the coast of Aden, Yemen, on October 12, 2000. One of the “alleged” bombers, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, has been in U.S. custody since 2002. But the Obama administration just announced it is once again dropping all charges against him.
Eric Holder‘s Justice Department wrote in a brief, “no charges are either pending or contemplated with respect to al-Nashiri in the near future.” This is the second time the Obama administration has stopped al-Nashiri’s trial, halting a Guantanamo Bay hearing shortly after Obama came to power in February 2009.
The trial seemed to be moving along last November — more than nine years after the bombing and seven years after the suspect’s capture — when Holder testified “the Cole bombing…was an attack on a United States warship, and that, I think, is appropriately placed into the military commission setting.”
Obama did not call the trial off over lack of evidence. Capt. Kirk Lippold, commander of the Cole when it was bombed, said, “I am very confident, based upon what I have heard, that there is more than sufficient evidence linking him to the attack on Cole directly.” The Washington Post quoted an unnamed military man who explained why Obama quit: “It’s all politics at this point,” he said.
The case is of more than passing importance. Lippold told Fox News, “The war on terror began not on 9/11 but on 10/12.” In fact, it began even before that, with the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the assault on the Khobar Towers in 1996, and the bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. The Cole bombing was the final push before 9/11. Bill Clinton’s response (or non-response) assured the worst terrorist attack in history would follow. In fact, Clinton had stalled the previous investigations into Islamic extremists’ attacks on America, because they undermined his foreign policy outreach to Iran (that sure paid off), and because they exposed his lie that his administration was eight years of “peace and prosperity.”
Now Barack Obama is following his footsteps and doing…nothing.
Obama is not prosecuting terrorists, not prosecuting the Black Panthers who intimidated Republican voters (or white Democrats, for that matter), not prosecuting illegal immigrants already set for deportation.
But he has instructed Eric Holder to sue the State of Arizona over its immigration bill and to legally harass Sheriff Joe Arpaio for doing the job Obama ought to be doing on the border.
Obama, Holder, and the Democrats have their priorities. Unfortunately, they aren’t America’s.
Anchor Babies, (Go) Away
Joe Guzzardi, Floyd Reports
Advocates of a stabilized U.S. population recently received an endorsement from three unlikely sources.
Senators John Kyl, Lindsey Graham, and Mitch McConnell, Republican proponents of comprehensive immigration reform, all spoke out against birthright citizenship. The practice allows children born on U.S. soil to become automatic citizens regardless of the immigration status of their mother.
McConnell wants to hold Congressional hearings on whether the policy commonly referred to as “anchor babies” is sustainable.
Kyl, the Senate Republican Whip, supports McConnell’s suggestion that birthright citizenship be reviewed. Citing the costs illegal aliens generate for state governments who must pay for their education and health care, Kyl during a CBS Face the Nation interview said: “The question is, if both parents are here illegally, should there be a reward for their illegal behavior?”
But Graham, referring to America’s bursting population, best summed up the birthright citizenship folly by calling it “a mistake.”
Said Graham:
People come here to have babies. They come here to drop a child. It’s called “drop and leave.” To have a child in America, they cross the border, they go to the emergency room, have a child, and that child is automatically an American citizen. That shouldn’t be the case. That attracts people here for all the wrong reasons.
“I’m a practical guy, but when you go forward, I don’t want 20 million more [immigrants] 20 years from now,” concluded Graham.
In the House, Representative Lamar Smith leads the charge behind H.R. 1868, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 that former Congressman Nathan Deal introduced.
Smith has long argued, correctly, that granting automatic citizenship to anyone born on American soil is a misinterpretation of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
And Smith is right. Congress willfully ignores the 14th Amendment’s first sentence that states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
An illegal alien from Mexico, for example, is not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States but of Mexico.
The new “American,” while only one person, opens the door for many others who could be added to the U.S. population.
The U.S.-born child becomes an American anchor that allows his parents and minor siblings to remain. Eventually, as a result of chain migration, his grandparents, aunts, uncles, in-laws, and all of their children can legally follow. One anchor baby may result in 50 new residents.
The newborn, whose mother may have come to the United States last week, is a citizen as fully as I who was born in California more than six decades ago and has paid taxes for more than half a century.
Since the estimates of illegal immigrants living in the United States range from 12-38 million and the exact number eludes even the Census Bureau, it’s hard to calculate how many children (and automatic citizens) are born each year. But unless the gift of citizenship is abolished, many millions more will take advantage of it.
That birthright citizenship, and its long term consequences, have Congress’ attention is encouraging to environmentally concerned Americans. Congress has finally caught up with more progressive nations.
Over the past 25 years, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, and France, among other countries, have modified jus soli (place of birth determines citizenship status).
Most countries have added to their birthright citizenship requirement that at least one parent be a legal resident or that a parent has lived a minimum number of years in the country of birth.
On its face, birthright citizenship is absurd and, as Graham pointed out, an easy target for abuse. Yet Congress has willfully refused to honestly confront it—until now.
Here’s an example of what’s at stake. People often ask me how long I have advocated for population stabilization and sensible immigration laws.
Sometimes I answer: “More than 25 years.” Usually I reply: “More than 50 million people ago.”
