Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Unconstitutional’

Biden’s Student Loan Bailout Sends Taxpayer Funds to On-Campus Mobs


BY: CHRISTOPHER JACOBS | MAY 07, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/07/bidens-loan-forgiveness-plan-makes-taxpayers-fund-on-campus-mobs/

protests on campus

Author Christopher Jacobs profile

CHRISTOPHER JACOBS

VISIT ON TWITTER@CHRISJACOBSHC

MORE ARTICLES

In remarks regarding the growing unrest on college campuses nationwide last Thursday, President Biden denounced the violent acts associated with many of the demonstrations and the growing wave of antisemitism on college campuses.

But, as the saying goes, talk is cheap. There’s one simple way to give his position teeth: Congress should enact legislation prohibiting the Department of Education from making taxpayers assume or otherwise modifying student loans for any student found responsible by his university or a court of law for acts of antisemitism, trespassing, property damage, intimidation, or violence.

Loan Giveaways Encourage Campus Chaos

Biden might be loath to admit it, but in many ways the campaign for mass student loan forgiveness has helped cause the current campus debacle. This year’s seniors entered college during the 2020 election campaign, meaning that most students currently on campus spent their college career hearing promises that much if not all of their debt would be forgiven.

This leftist movement to make American taxpayers pay off other people’s college debt has further weakened the already-tenuous link between a degree and its earning potential. If they believe the government will ultimately forgive the cost of their education, students have no reason not to major in Grievance Studies, or some similar Marxist-adjacent course of study. Assuming their loan debts will get nationalized also makes students less concerned about potential employers refusing to hire them due to their participation in on-campus riots.

With less incentive for students to choose practical degrees, and officials prioritizing woke nostrums over intellectual rigor, colleges have given up all pretense of ideological balance. As a result, some institutions have become less like universities and more like madrassas, places that inculcate and radicalize youths rather than educate them.

The way Biden has continued to pursue loan forgiveness, despite a rebuke of his unconstitutional plan by the Supreme Court, set an example that demonstrators have replicated. The president may now deprecate the mob’s actions, and call for respect for the rule of law, but when he publicly brags that the nation’s highest court “didn’t stop me” from pursuing his objectives, can anyone blame the would-be jihadis on campus for thinking themselves entitled to take the law into their own hands?

Restore Sanity to Campuses

Congress can and should take a stand, by cutting off the financial spigot for participants in the bedlam. If Biden opposes the chaos on campus so strongly, he should be willing to take a break from buying votes via taxpayer loan payoffs to cut off access for those creating mayhem. And if Democrats on the left like Rep. Ilhan Omar wish to exclude from loan payoffs any participants in Islamophobic or other offensive acts, few Republicans — who oppose Biden’s forgiveness proposals outright — will object.

Some might fear this proposal would encourage already-timid university administrators to take a weaker line against the demonstrators because individuals held responsible could face significant financial repercussions. But in some cases, civil authorities may be able to act irrespective of whether the higher education institutions in question do. More importantly, this measure should deter students as much as university officials, if not more so.

Another potential concern, that Congress prohibiting loan bailouts for a narrow sliver of the population might be viewed as lawmakers permitting Biden’s power grab for other students, doesn’t appear to pass muster, either. The House passed a bill last spring disapproving Biden’s original student loan payoff plan, but the fact that the measure didn’t get enacted into law didn’t stop the Supreme Court from striking the plan down as an unconstitutional power grab.

Finally, this proposal focuses solely on actions, not speech. Like all other Americans, students can and should have the right to protest, and to express their views, however offensive others may find them. But when speech crosses into intimidation, or encampments that create safety and health concerns, let alone breaking into buildings, those actions should bring consequences — in this case, financial ones.

A Practical Solution

Prohibiting student loan payoffs is less expensive and more practical than the other alternative: giving demonstrators a one-way ticket to the Gaza Strip. It would also send a message in clear and uncertain terms about what the American people, through their elected representatives, think of the mayhem that has unfolded in recent weeks.

In the longer term, the recent campus chaos should prompt Congress to consider repealing the student loan program entirely, a reform that would incentivize students and universities to prioritize college affordability, while saving taxpayers at least $300 billion over the coming decade. But at minimum, lawmakers should act now to ensure that hard-working taxpayers are not subsidizing participants in violent demonstrations on campuses nationwide.


Chris Jacobs is founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group, and author of the book “The Case Against Single Payer.” He is on Twitter: @chrisjacobsHC.

Liberals Try to Cover Up for Obamacare Architect


Transcript from the Rush Limbaugh Show, November 11, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/11/11/liberals_try_to_cover_up_for_obamacare_architect

RUSH: This is incredible.  The liberals at the University of Pennsylvania tried to take down the video of Jonathan Gruber saying they had to dumb down the presentation of Obamacare because of the stupidity of the American voter.  They thought they could take the video down and make the issue go away.

You remember Jonathan Gruber. By the way, he’s the architect of Obamacare, and I should say that he’s one of the primary architects of Romneycare as well.  It was in October of last year at the University of Pennsylvania’s 24th Annual Health Economics Conference, and he said that it was crucial that the American people never realize what was really in Obamacare because the stupidity of the American voter would have otherwise killed the law.

In other words, he admitted — and he got applause, he was talking to fellow economists — he admitted they had to lie.  They had to mask and cover the transparency.  They had to lie about what was in it, such as you get to keep your doctor, you get to keep your plan, your premium will come down $2,500.  There are no tax increases.  It’s not gonna cost any more than the Iraq war.  Every lie they told was purposeful because they thought the American public was so stupid they wouldn’t understand the nuance and the liberal definition of need for this law, and that if they had been honest about it, people would never have supported it.

That covers pretty much everything in their agenda, by the way.  If they’re ever honest about their real agenda, they’d never get elected to anything outside of New York, San Francisco and Hollywood.  And they wouldn’t, folks.  And maybe Chicago.  They would not.  It’s not just Obamacare they lie about.  It’s not just Obamacare they think you are too stupid to understand.

So, anyway, the University of Pennsylvania, after the uproar of this getting out, tried to pull it down.  They pulled the video of the event which took place in October of 2013.  And for a time yesterday, if you went to the website at the University of Pennsylvania trying to see the video, you got a message that said: “This video has been removed by the user.  Sorry about that.”  And so that begot a Twitter and Facebook storm.

“Why would Penn pull down a public video that has political implications?”  Was one of the questions.  Because they’re a bunch of liberals is why, and because their truth was exposed.  It was major.  They tried to pull it down.

Anyway, they ended up having to put it back up because they began to look like fools, thinking that they could put back in the bottle the genie that had already been released.  You can’t do that.  So they put it back up.  But it was funny to watch ’em scramble around, folks, like turning on the lights and a bunch of rats in the barn going nuts at being exposed and discovered.  They tried to turn the lights back off and it didn’t work.

Speaking of Obamacare, the Washington Post is, on its best day, hapless.  The Washington Post is an absolute sorry excuse for what it used to be.  But even with that, they continue to set new standards for incompetence and bias and just being plain wrong.  There’s a story by Jose DelReal: “Obamacare Consultant Under Fire for ‘Stupidity of the American Voter’ Comment.” Now, this reporter is obviously just a Democrat with a press pass, which is what most of them at the New York Times and the Washington Post are.  They’re Democrats disguised as journalists. Give them a little press pass, let ’em go there, pretend to be reporters and so forth.

He sells whatever is left of his journalistic soul in this piece.  Let me give you just one pull quote from it, as they’re still trying to put the genie back in the bottle.  Now, remember, this is for their liberal readers, Washington Post, liberal reader base, New York Times, same thing.  They’re trying to calm their reader base. This is not a big deal, don’t worry. Gruber didn’t screw it up for everybody. It’s okay, it’s okay, trying to calm everybody down.

Listen to this quote from the story:  “Gruber’s remarks have been greeted by the law’s critics as an admission of intentionally deceiving the American public about the law in 2010. But given the context of the remarks, Gruber seems to be speaking specifically about how and why the law’s funding mechanisms were framed when the law was being written.”

This guy thinks he’s helping Gruber by saying that, and he is hammering another nail in the coffin.  Jose, that is exactly the point!  People were deceived about the funding mechanism.  That was the key, key, key to getting it passed. How the thing was gonna be paid for was the key to it getting passed.  Oh, and the lie to Bart Stupak about it not funding abortions.

But the way this thing was being funded, the way it was gonna be paid for, the way it wasn’t gonna cost anybody anything, the way it was gonna allow people to keep their doctors and keep their plans and lower their premiums and their deductibles? That was key to this thing getting passed, and he writes (summarized), “Well, if you read the context, if you’re given the context of Professor Gruber’s remarks…

“He seems to be speaking specifically about how and why the law’s funding mechanisms were framed,” lied about.  This guy’s trying to get this guy out of a jam, and he digs a deeper hole!  But remember, he’s dealing with his own liberal-Democrat reader base, and they are looking for holes to be dragged out of.  So they’ll take anything that they can get.  “Economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the Regime’s consultants on the…”

He was not a consultant.  He was the architect, Jose.  He “is under attack from conservatives for comments he made last year in which he seemingly said,” and then he quotes (laughing), “the stupidity of the American voter.”  Seemingly?  Seemingly said?  He didn’t “seemingly” say it.  He stated unambiguously that they had to lie about this thing because of “the stupidity of the American people.”

Actually if you examine that, I think really what he means is, “We had to lie because of the intelligence of the American people.  We had to lie to them, otherwise they would have seen what we intended to do.”  That means they’re pretty smart, when you get right down to it, and that’s what bothers them.  Now, that’s not to say that Gruber and his ilk on the left and in the Democrat Party do not consider you and American voters to be a bunch of stiffs and stupid.

It doesn’t mean they don’t still hold you in contempt.

But what he’s really saying is, “We had to lie. We had to lie, because they’re too stupid… No, they’re too smart, actually.  They would see what really is intended here unless we lie.”  So you relied on what you thought was their stupid gullibility to believe your lie, is what you were relying on. And it’s 2010, so there’s still some residual messianic attitudes about Obama in 2010.  So that’s what they were relying on.

Anyway, it’s CYA time at the Washington Post.  But it’s not over for the bad news about Obamacare.  From the Washington Times: “Obamacare May Not Have Enough Enrollees to Stay Solvent — Fewer than 10 million projected; 13 million needed to stay solvent. The [Regime] on Monday said fewer than 10 million Americans will enroll in Obamacare’s health exchanges this go-around, well short of the 13 million target congressional scorekeepers deemed critical to its economics…”

Meaning: They’ve gotta have 13 million people paying premiums through the nose in order to fund this thing.  It suggests “another rocky rollout in the law’s second year of full operation,” and it’s next week (chuckling) when the mandate hits.  It’s next week when the next wave of unforeseen expenses hit everybody.

“Policy advisers at the Health & Human Services Department estimated that 9 million to 9.9 million people would enroll through the exchanges — or only a slight increase over the 8 million that the [Regime] says were active at the end of the first enrollment period this April. The Congressional Budget Office, which is the government’s official scorekeeper, had predicted the law would need 13 million customers on the exchanges. …

“‘Under the president’s health care law, Americans have experienced broken exchanges, canceled coverage, higher premiums and unaffordable deductibles,’ said Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California Republican and chairman of the House oversight committee… ‘Despite the administration’s habit of moving the goal posts, the fact is Obamacare is simply not delivering the results Americans were originally promised by the president.'”

Neither is anything else, and this the American people know, which explains the election results this past Tuesday.  “The number of enrollees is key, because if too few take part in the exchanges, the pool of customers is too small, and it could skew the economics of Obamacare, forcing insurers to raise premiums and pushing even more people to forgo coverage, choosing to pay the tax penalty instead,” the FINE.

Stop and think of something here.  We have Obamacare.  It was gonna save the day. It was gonna insure all the uninsured. It was gonna make sure that the previous existing condition people were covered. It was gonna be magic, right?  Now, what are we talking about here?  They’re hoping to get 13 million people?

How many people are in this country, 250 million adults, 220?  What is it?  I don’t care, 10 million, 13 million. It’s chump change.  It’s nothing. They got 8.8 million the first go round?  We’re nowhere near mass adoption of this. You know, there’s a new group of people elected in the House of Representatives that just been handed another golden opportunity here.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  Here’s the truth of the matter, folks.  If the American people were stupid, the Democrats would still run the Senate and maybe even the House of Representatives. If the American people were stupid.  This, by the way, really grates on the Democrats, believe me, ’cause if the American people were stupid — meaning falling for all the lies — the Republicans wouldn’t have been elected.

It is elitism that is ignorant because it’s arrogant and conceited, and Jonathan Gruber is an elitist and therefore has no idea what life is really like for all the people he’s out there writing legislation for.  All he knows is that they’re stupid, and they can’t deal with the truth.  They don’t know what’s best for ’em. So in order to give them what’s best for them (Obamacare), we have to lie to them.

The American people are just a bunch of idiots.

So lies got Barack Obama elected, twice.  Corrupt politics got Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote.  But this brilliant economist, Jonathan Gruber, wasn’t smart enough to make Obamacare popular.  Imagine that!  If the American people were so stupid, they could have been talked into how wonderfully great this legislation is and they’d been out there signing up.

They’d be going nuts, throwing parties, talking about how they’ve all got free health care, but the American people are not that stupid and didn’t fall for this.  Obamacare has never enjoyed majority public support.  You really can’t outsmart free markets for very long.  Reality eventually sets in and the lies end up uncovered.  Markets work. Be they intellectual markets or economic markets, they work.

But you know what’s really tied up in all this?  The people of this country trusted Barack Obama, and in 2010 they still did.  They thought they had created a moment in world history: Electing the first African-American president in a country that had featured slavery in its distant past.  They trusted Obama.  He was gonna fix everything.  He was a new kind of man, a new kind of politician.

But not to me.

Folks, what’s happened here is exactly why we have to go after the credibility these Democrats — this includes Hillary — before they are elected and it demonstrates itself.

We have to go after their credibility.

We have to just because we know we’re right!

We can’t afford to elect ’em anymore.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: So here comes Dana Milbank at the fledgling Washington Post, same thing’s happening to them: “Why Obamacare Risks Falling into a ‘Death Spiral’ — So it turns out there is an Obamacare death panel after all.”  See, there is.  There are death panels, but this guy continues to deny the truth.  You’re not smart enough to deal with the reality of what a death panel really is.  Sarah Palin came along and blew the whole thing by correctly naming the advisory board that determines who gets treatment and who doesn’t.  That’s a death panel.  That was one of those truths that the Obamacare architects could not allow out there.  So they had to attack her, destroy her, again, and anybody else that picked up the mantra.

So on the left they continue living in their fantasy world, that Obamacare is not what it is.  And what they don’t understand is the whole country is away ahead of ’em.  This stupid bunch of Americans are way ahead of the Drive-By Media, which is caught twisting and turning in the past trying to save an already ruined presidency.  Well, ruined in the popular way presidencies are judged, presidential approval, blah, blah, blah.  In terms of actual accomplishments that are attached to Obama’s real goal, it’s a very successful administration, transforming the country.  But I don’t want to get too intricate for this purpose here.

Dana Milbank is worried about the Supreme Court.  That’s the death panel for Obamacare.  Oh, yeah.  “It has nine members and it operates out of a marble building directly across the street from the Capitol. When the Supreme Court on Friday announced that it would take up another challenge to the Affordable Care Act in March, it delivered the threat of two mortal blows to the signature achievement of the Obama presidency. First, it raised the possibility that the justices, who narrowly spared the law in 2012, will in June come out with a new ruling that would dismantle the law on different grounds.”

originalYou know what a real threat or fear that the left has about this?  They know that Obamacare is unconstitutional.  They’ve known it since it was written.  Gruber lets the cat out of the bag by saying we had to lie and we had to cover the transparency because of the stupidity of the American people.  In other words, we had to lie in order to get this thing passed, because if people knew what it really was, it wouldn’t stand the light of day, it wouldn’t stand a chance.

The unconstitutionality is the Commerce Clause and the fact that the federal government can’t force to you buy anything.  They can’t force you to buy anything.  So that begot the argument, is it a mandate, is it a tax?  The federal government can tax.  But, no, it’s not a tax.  It’s a fine.  If you don’t buy insurance, we’re gonna fine you.  They can’t!  The Fourth Amendment.  They can’t.  However — and this is the fear the left has — they know that the Supreme Court just didn’t want to go there.  I mean, it was the first black president.  It was a major signature legislation and it was for health care for the poor, and, okay, we’ll look the other way.

So John Roberts did some finagling and found a way to make this thing sound constitutional.  But the left knows that a whole bunch of chicanery took place.  They know they’re hanging by a thread.  They know they’re on thin ice here, and they know that a lot of justices — well, they don’t know, but I suspect they fear a lot of justices have been chomping at the bit for a second go round at this thing, ’cause it isn’t constitutional, folks.  If we were in a totally objective, nonpartisan, sane world, this law would have been struck down inside of three hours of it arriving at the Supreme Court.

The federal government simply cannot demand that we buy things.  It’s right there in the Commerce Clause in the Fourth Amendment.  They cannot do it.  Ways were achieved to mask what is really happening by calling these things fines if you don’t buy it, blah, blah.  So they know they’re hanging by a thread, and they know they may be even on borrowed time.  And now the court, the Supreme Court, decided to hear the case again, this time over subsidies.  This is an area that in an objective, black and white, sane world, the Regime doesn’t have a prayer.

The point of this is real simple.  The only subsidies for Obamacare are available at state exchanges.  Well, as you recall, most states did not set one up, and therefore the people in those states, according to the law, had no way of getting subsidized Obamacare.  And, believe me, subsidized is the only way the vast majority of Americans can afford it, because it’s so damned expensive.  Subsidies meaning taxpayers pay a greater portion of your policy than you do.  So when this eventuated, when the states, Republican governors in these states refused to set up exchanges, that left a whole lot of people out of the subsidies, and that just wasn’t — oh, we can’t allow that politically.  I mean, that would be political disaster for Obama.

He’s out there promising everything’s gonna get cheaper. He’s promising the uninsured are gonna get insured. He’s promising don’t worry about what it costs, gonna be subsidized, except most people don’t live in a state with an exchange.  Oh, no.  So the federal government violated its own law and set up its own exchanges, which, whoever wrote this law, Gruber, stupidly left in that the federal government could not set up its own exchanges.  They had to be set up in the states.

By the way, there was a purpose for that.

That was to shift as much of the cost off to the states as they could to keep the overall final number under that precious $3 trillion figure.  So Obamacare was written in a way to dump as much cost off to the states as possible, and that’s when the governors said, “Unh-uh! We’re not just gonna sit here and accept these new costs.  We can’t print money like you can.”

So they didn’t set up the exchanges.

It’s the unintended consequences. The liberals think the people are just a bunch of sheep and whatever legislation comes down they’re gonna abide by it and not find ways around it.  Well, when they figured out that a whole bunch of people were not gonna be qualified for subsidies, the federal government violated Obamacare and created their own exchanges…

That’s what the Supreme Court’s gonna hear.  The Supreme Court’s essentially gonna hear: Are those subsidies that are being provided by the federal government constitutional? Are they part of the law, or has this whole thing been turned upside down?  As Milbank writes about it, “But even if the justices make no such ruling,” meaning, striking it down, “the very act of taking up the challenge to the law will itself undermine the law.”

So Milbank is in fatalistic, defeatist mode because all the court had to do was take the case and that undermines it.  If they’d have just flat-out rejected it, fine and dandy.  But the Supreme Court has taken the case.  They’re gonna hear it; they’re gonna have an opinion.  It doesn’t matter what the opinion is. The very fact they’re taking the case undermines it.  Why?  Because Milbank and these people know that this thing is a crock.

Gruber and everybody lied about it. They created a bunch of falsehoods in it.  It’s unsupportable economically.  The American people don’t want it! But that doesn’t matter to them.  They want it.  They want you subjected to it, subordinated to it — and the very idea that the court’s gonna look at it again is just gonna create (in the minds of all these stupid Americans) the idea that something’s wrong with the law, and we can’t have that.

“We’ve gotta get people finally accepting this and ignoring this and moving on to other things! The more attention on Obamacare, the greater the opportunity everybody’s gonna find out the fraud that is in it.”  That’s why they’re quaking today. Just the fact that the case is being accepted, taken up by the court, has got them scared to death.  And it has them scared because they know what a house of cards this thing is, folks.

Read more at: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/11/11/liberals_try_to_cover_up_for_obamacare_architect

By WhatDidYouSay.org

By WhatDidYouSay.org

Company Fires Employee For Having Gun…IN HIS OWN HOME


Obamacare

Posted by Tony Oliva on Oct 9, 2014

 Read more at http://bulletsfirst.net/2014/10/09/company-fires-employee-gun-home/#IQFCTHiFOdbiIq1Q.99

foolishness

hitler

Under the guise of “zero tolerance”, gun hating private community Lakes of the Four Seasons (LOFS) has fired a seasonal landscaping George Washington regarding 2nd Amandmentemployee of 21 years because he was a gun owner.  And no, I don’t mean that he was carrying a gun while working, nor did he have a gun in his car on LOFS property.

Nino Ferlaino had worked for LOFS for 21 years before this summer when, in conversation amongst coworkers, he acknowledged that he believed in the 2nd Amendment and kept a gun at home.

Two days following this conversation, on July 2nd, Ferlaino’s supervisor, Doug Weiss, approached him and asked him if he carried a gun. Ferlaino admitted that he owned a gun but never carried it while working.

Let me interject something.  While in Ferlaino’s mind he was just having a pleasant break time conversation among coworkers, someone in that group heard “gun owner” and went bat-poo crazy and no doubt started telling everyone that Ferlaino was carrying machine guns and weeds weren’t the only thing he was looking to whack.   Such is the demented mindset of hoplophobes, that they wet their pants at the mere notion of someone owner a gun.

So, due to this hoplophobia, Weiss informed Ferlaino that he had met with the property owners association’s board of directors July 1 and that Ferlaino’s conversation with his co-workers violated the company’s “no tolerance policy.”  As such, he was fired effective immediately.

There is SO much wrong with this cluster flop.  Like, how exactly is the simple fact of being a gun owner a violation of any policy?  After 21 years Mr. Ferlaino doesn’t get a warning or a reprimand but rather summarily fired?  Also, Ferlaino doesn’t get a chance to answer any of this before being fired?  I mean, even when Weiss spoke to him on July 2nd the decision was all ready made on July 1st.

Criminals and DictatorsThanks to the forward thinking of the State of Indiana, not only is the LOFS actions immoral and unethical but they are also ILLEGAL.

It is that last part that has brought on the lawsuit by Ferlaino against the Property Owners Association.  According to Ferlaino’s attorney, Marissa McDermott:

The association violated Indiana’s “take your gun to work law,” which was amended in 2011, because it required Ferlaino to divulge information about owing a gun and fired him because he’s a gun owner.

Also, even if Ferlaino had brought his gun to work and left it secured in his car, the law forbids employers from punishing employees who exercise that option.

Not only is Ferlaino is seeking actual and punitive damages, attorney fees etc. he’s also asking a judge to order the property owners association to refrain from engaging in similar practices with regard to other employees.

Though I’ve no doubt that a hit to the pocket books of these bigoted wannabee thought police members of the LOFS Property Owner’s Association will be an added reminder not to oppress those who choose to exercise their rights when it has nothing to do with work.

I wish Ferlaino luck in his lawsuit and hope he is compensated accordingly.

Article collective closing

White House Press Secretary: ‘We’re Not Just Going to Sit Around and Wait’ for Congress to Write Laws


Trigger the Vote

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/26/Obama-Working-With-DHS-For-Executive-Action-On-Illegal-Immigration

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told Congress Tuesday he would consider “every conceivable, lawful option” to deal with a continuing flood of immigrants crossing the U.S. border illegally in southern…

26 Jun 2014

President Obama, tired of waiting for Congress to act on immigration reform, is currently exploring ways to address issues with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

During an interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest explained that the Obama administration was getting impatient with Congress.Tyranney Alert

“[W]e’re not just going to sit around and wait interminably for Congress,” he explained. “We’ve been waiting a year already. The president has tasked his Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson with reviewing what options are available to the president, what is at his disposal using his executive authority to try to address some of the problems that have been created by our broken immigration system.”

“In other words, MORE TYRANNY. Now he isn’t hiding it. He is proud of the fact that he thinks himself King Obama, and doers not have to answer to the Constitution.” JB

Earnest added that, although Obama was exploring executive action, it was Eagle Really on immigration reform.

“That’s why we’re trying to focus on getting that done,” he concluded.

Obama has been heavily criticized after his 2012 executive decision to defer the deportations of some young illegal immigrants, which critics argue was a key incentive for more children to cross the border illegally.

executive

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comming Soon 02

Cloward Pevin with explanation

Article collective closing

 

 

Today’s Political Cartoon


CONSERVATIVE-BYTE-BANNER

‘A Line in the Sand’: Growing number of Sheriffs and Peace officers are joining together to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States


Red Flag Banner

<img src=”http://static.squarespace.com/static/4f34530ecb12e336a9dfe29c/t/52eb2c9fe4b08f94e6d8d147/1391144096221/usa-obama.jpg” alt=”RELATED STORY: Chief of Police Harassed by Feds, Placed on Leave After Signing Pledge to Uphold Constitution” />RELATED STORY: Chief of Police Harassed by Feds, Placed on Leave After 
Signing Pledge to Uphold Constitution
(by Michael Connelly, Constitutional Attorney) — On January 24, 2014 I attended a meeting of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. The group is run by former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack who led the charge to keep the Constitution and particularly the Tenth Amendment alive. He and a handful of other Constitutional Sheriffs sued the Clinton administration because it was trying to force them to violate their oath of office by enforcing provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.

Sheriff Mack objected to this because he believed that the act was unconstitutional and that the Federal government was not empowered to force local law enforcement officials to enforce Federal laws. The United States Supreme Court ultimately agreed with him in a landmark decision in the case Mack/Printz v USA.

Now, a growing number of like-minded Sheriffs and Peace officers have joined together to defend their oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. They have drawn a line in the and by saying that they will not enforce or allow any laws to be enforced in their jurisdictions that violate the constitutional rights of the Americans they serve.

I had the honor of being present when this group of heroes drew up and signed a historic document setting forth there dedication to freedom. Here is a link to that resolution: http://cspoa.org/cspoa-jan-2014-resolution/ (See Below)

The document speaks for itself and I believe hundreds of law enforcement and other public officials will come forward to add their names to it. However, it will take courage because there have already been attempts at both the Federal government and some state governments to intimidate members of the CSPOA. At the United States Justice Foundation (www.usjf.net) we will do our part to defend these brave Americans who are stepping up to the plate for us and our Constitution.

I encourage everyone to send a copy of this document to your local sheriff and other law enforcement officials and urge them to sign it and join the CSPOA. This group may represent our last line of defense against tyranny.

http://cspoa.org/cspoa-jan-2014-resolution/

CSPOA Jan 2014 Resolution

The following was drafted at a meeting of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA) on Jan 24, 2014 in Las Vegas, Nevada and approved by the members present.  We encourage all sheriffs, peace officers and those in public office to sign with us.

To add your name, download a printable version, print it, sign it, scan it and submit it here.


Resolution Of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers AssociationPursuant to the powers and duties bestowed upon us by our citizens, the undersigned do hereby resolve that any Federal officer, agent, or employee, regardless of supposed congressional authorization, is required to obey and observe limitations consisting of the enumerated powers as detailed within Article 1 Section 8 of the U S Constitution and the Bill Of Rights.

 

The people of these united States are, and have a right to be, free and independent, and these rights are derived from the “Law of Nature and nature’s God.” As such, they must be free from infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, unreasonable searches and seizures, capricious detainments and every other natural right whether enumerated or not, pursuant to the 9th amendment.

We further reaffirm that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” (10th amendment)

Furthermore, we maintain that no agency established by the U S Congress can develop its own policies or regulations which supersede the Bill of Rights or the Constitution, nor does the executive branch have the power to make law, overturn law or set aside law.

Therefore, in order to protect the American people, BE IT RESOLVED THAT,

The following abuses will not be allowed or tolerated:

1) Registration of personal firearms under any circumstances.

2) Confiscation of firearms without probable cause, due process, and constitutionally compliant warrants issued by a local or state jurisdiction.

3) Audits or searches of a citizen’s personal affairs or finances without probable cause, and due process, and constitutionally compliant warrants issued by a local or state jurisdiction.

4) Inspections of person or property without probable cause and constitutionally compliant warrants as required by the 4th Amendment and issued by a local or state jurisdiction.

5) The detainment or search of citizens without probable cause and proper due process compliance, or the informed consent of the citizen.

6) Arrests with continued incarcerations without charges and complete due process, including, but not limited to public and speedy jury trials, in a court of state or local jurisdiction.

7) Domestic utilization of our nation’s military or federal agencies operating under power granted under the laws of war against American citizens.

8) Arrest of citizens or seizure of persons or property without first notifying and obtaining the express consent of the local sheriff.

AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the undersigned Sheriffs, Peace Officers, and other Public Servants, do hereby denounce any acts or agencies which promote the aforementioned practices. All actions by the Federal Government and its agents will conform strictly and implicitly with the principles expressed within the United States Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights.

There is no greater obligation or responsibility of any government officer than to protect the rights of the people. Thus, any conduct contrary to the United States Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or the Bill of Rights will be dealt with as criminal activity.


Join us now! download a printable version, print it, sign it, scan it and submit it here.

TOTAL SIGNERS AS OF 1/31/2014: 40

Signers are listed alphabetically by state, then by County/Agency.  Click the date to see the actual signature.

ST Agency Title Name Signed
AZ CSPOA Founder Richard Mack 1/24/2014
AZ Arizona State Committeman Rick Dalton 1/24/2014
CA San Bernadino County Campaign Manager Lawrence Hebron 1/24/2014
CA Riverside County Candidate for Governor of California Robert C. Newman II, PhD 1/24/2014
CA Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Paul Schrader 1/24/2014
CA Modoc County Sheriff Mike Poindexter 1/24/2014
DE Sussex County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Jeff Christopher 1/24/2014
FL Florida Citizen Michael Alvarez 1/30/2014
FL Liberty County Sheriff Nick Finch 1/24/2014
ID Benewah County Sheriff Dave Resser 1/24/2014
IN Elkhart County Sheriff Bradley Rogers 1/24/2014
KS Sherman County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Burton Pianalto 1/24/2014
KY Jackson County Sheriff Denny Peyman 1/24/2014
KY Kenton County Sheriff Charles Lee Korzenborn 1/24/2014
MD The Institute on the Constitution Esquire Michael Peroutka 1/24/2014
MD DHS Federal Protective Service Supervisory Special Agent (Retired) Christopher Fiora 1/24/2014
MI Barry County Sheriffs Department Barry County Sheriffs Auxillary Douglas Hull 1/30/2014
MI Barry County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Darin Leaf 1/24/2014
MI Benzie County Sheriff Ted Schendel 1/24/2014
MO Old Monroe Chief of Police Larry Kirk 1/24/2014
MO Christian County Sheriff Joey Kyle 1/24/2014
MO Osage County Sheriff Michael Dixon 1/24/2014
NM Jemez Springs Police Chief Shane Harger 1/24/2014
NM Valencia County Sheriff Rene Rivera 1/24/2014
NV Clark County Candidate for Sherriff Gordon Martines 1/24/2014
NY Society for the Preservation of our American Reubl Founder and President Robert  Laity 1/29/2014
OR Morrow County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Ken Matlack 1/24/2014
PA Clymer Law Attorney James Clymer 1/24/2014
PA Office of Constable for the 9th Ward State Constable Ed Quiggle, Jr. 1/24/2014
TN Fentress County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Sheriff Larry Crabtree 1/24/2014
TN Fentress County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Sheriff David Oppenheim 1/24/2014
TX Dallas County Candidate for Sherriff Kirk Launius 1/24/2014
TX Ellis County County Commissioner Paul Perry 1/24/2014
TX Shackelford County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Sheriff Donovon Boyett 1/24/2014
TX Edwards County Sheriff Pamela Elliott 1/24/2014
TX Shackelford County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Edward Miller 1/24/2014
TX Dallas Police Department Sr. Cpl. Thomas Haney 1/24/2014
UT Beaver County Sheriff Cameron Noel 1/24/2014
UT Utah County Sheriff Department Sheriff James Tracy 1/24/2014
WA Cowlitz County Deputy Sheriff Nathan Hockett 1/24/2014

Add your name to the list. download a printable version, print it, sign it, scan it and submit it here.

 

Image

Pathway Around Congress


Pathway-Around-Congress

Tag Cloud