Obama unleashed: Defies GOP election wins, moves in opposite direction

27 Nov

leadership 2

By David Lightman and Anita Kumar

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has spent November acting with a defiant fury, moving with little regard for the message voters sent at the polls.

Instead of reaching out to Republicans who won control of next year’s Congress Nov. 4, he’s charged ahead with initiatives that infuriate the victors, prompting critics to label him a “king” or “emperor.”

Wednesday, the Obama administration began an effort aimed at easing smog-related pollution. Earlier this month, Obama took executive action on immigration and climate change. The White House has suggested he would block the Keystone XL pipeline. He’s vowed to have the federal government regulate Internet access.

This damn-the-GOP-torpedoes burst is dramatically different from the contrition and soul searching other presidents endured after their parties suffered stinging defeats.

c831e-yourvotecounts2bi2bsomehow2bdoubt2bthat

George W. Bush worked with the new Democratic-controlled Congress after the 2006 election to craft economic stimulus legislation. Bill Clinton in 1994 overhauled his political team and would work to craft a bipartisan welfare overhaul. After Republicans lost Senate control in 1986, Ronald Reagan brought in Washington insider Howard Baker, who had been Senate majority leader, to run his staff.

Obama instead draws his already insular circle tighter. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel doesn’t spout the White House line in public, so he’s out. Chief of Staff Denis McDonough becomes a frequent visitor to Congress but doesn’t heed warnings from Republican leaders that an immigration order would be political poison.

83a6f-20142belection2bgraphic

“Free at last; free at last from the bondage of (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid, threats from the Republican leadership, and persistent press ‘wimp’ criticism,” said Stephen Wayne, a presidential scholar at Georgetown University.

“Now he can do what he thinks is right and to the extent possible do so with the help of loyal compatriots that believe in him and his priorities,” he said.

Two factors appear to be driving Obama. “He wants to prove he’s still relevant,” said Darrell West, vice president and director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution, a center-left policy research center.

And engaged, said White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer.

“Typically, when you have a change in power in Congress, the new congressional majority dominates the conversation and drives the discussion,” Pfeiffer said. “Since right after the election, the president has been driving the discussions, moving forward aggressively on core priorities.”

Voters, though, generally rejected those core priorities, as Republicans had a net gain of at least eight Senate seats and will start 2015 with their biggest majority in the House of Representatives since the late 1940s.

Obama maintains he’s on the right course; it’s just that Republican obstructionists have made progress difficult.

That’s a different take on defeat. Presidents whose parties were crushed in midterm elections were occasionally stubborn but usually found new ways to work with the other side.

Americans made it clear in 2006 they’d had enough of the Iraq war, then in its fourth year. Two months after the election, Bush announced a “surge” of additional troops, even though Democrats who now ran Congress wanted a withdrawal timetable.

Bush reached out to congressional leaders on other fronts, and by 2008, they agreed on an economic stimulus package, international help for AIDS victims and the financial industry bailout. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called Bush “a lovely man.”

Clinton got his jolt in 1994 when Republicans won control of both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years. Clinton shook up his political team, installing Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and South Carolina party stalwart Don Fowler as head of the Democratic National Committee.

Fowler this week saw big differences between Clinton and Obama. “Bill Clinton is a person who enjoys people,” he said. “He was very comfortable dealing with new people.”

Obama has always kept deliberations within a group of close friends and advisers, rarely meeting with his Cabinet or lobbying lawmakers. The inner circle includes senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, who was close to the president in Chicago, McDonough and National Security Adviser Susan Rice.

Rather than move toward the Republicans since the elections on Nov. 4, Obama has defied them:

– Nov. 10. He declared strong support for net neutrality, the idea that Internet content be freely available and subject to government regulation to protect consumers. Opening the door to government regulation infuriated conservatives.

– Nov. 12. During Obama’s Asia trip, the United States and China unexpectedly agreed to new targets for greenhouse gas emissions designed help combat climate change. Republicans complained that Obama unilaterally decided the U.S. would cut greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels in the next 11 years.

lie 2

– Nov. 20. Obama announced he would unilaterally protect millions of immigrants who are in the United States illegally from deportation.

– Nov. 24. Obama pushed out Hagel, a former Republican senator. It was widely reported that Hagel was dismissed after a series of disagreements. Previous Obama defense secretaries complained that national security discussions were often insular and guided from the White House predominantly by domestic politics.

– Nov. 26. The Obama administration said it will move to implement tougher air quality standards for ozone. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, branded the plan “massive new regulation” that would “cost our economy millions of jobs.”

Overall, Ken Mayer, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who wrote the book “With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power,” said it appears that Obama and his advisers saw no reason to hold back despite the pledges by Republican leaders to cooperate with him.

immigration 1

Obama has signaled he won’t let up anytime soon.

The White House has strongly suggested Obama would veto a bill authorizing the Keystone XL oil pipeline – a top priority of the new Republican Congress – saying he will wait for completion of a State Department review.

And advocates are hopeful that he will be emboldened to tackle a Cold War relic. They want him to restore diplomatic ties and ease restrictions on travel and trade with Cuba, even though it would infuriate many South Florida Republicans.

After all, said Pfeiffer, “There is no reward for being meek here.”

Tags:

Mark Caserta: Obama’s leadership divides the nation

27 Nov

leadership 1

Nov. 27, 2014 @ 12:00 AM

“Then join hand in hand, brave Americans all, by uniting we stand, by dividing we fall.”

This long-standing American motto, originating in the 1768 patriotic ballad, “The Liberty Song” by John Dickenson, bears great significance to the times in which we live. For our country certainly seems more divided now than at any other time in recent history.

Americans have always been connected at the heart by their love of country. We’ve taken pride in being an exceptional nation built on the principles of the Constitution and sustained by the rule of law.

But it seems America is becoming increasingly divided. A recent Rasmussen poll showed 67 percent of voters say America is more divided as a nation than it was four years ago, with only 7 percent of those surveyed believing America is less divided.

I believe this waning of the American spirit is largely due to the dramatic change America has undergone the last few years and the lack of transparency with which President Obama has governed. His mission to fundamentally transform America has clearly destabilized nearly every sector of our lives and polarized good people genuinely seeking answers.

leadership 3

While liberals champion the nation’s economic recovery, “Obamanomics” is simply an illusion of prosperity. President Obama insisted he would revive the economy by spending $1 trillion on the stimulus. But the money is gone, and the economy is still bad. What good is this so-called “recovery” when it fails to provide relief for the average American? Have you been to the grocery store lately?

And the government’s unemployment numbers simply don’t reflect reality. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a large portion of the jobs being created are in food service and the retail trade. But even this statistic is misleading. The looming Obamacare employer mandate requiring employers to provide health insurance for employees averaging 30 hours or more per week is forcing workers out of their full-time jobs. As a result, they have to acquire multiple part-time jobs simply to survive. These are real people trying to make ends meet. They deserve better.

And while the BLS “official unemployment rate” is 5.8 percent, a more telling rate is derived from the Total Unemployed number of Americans which includes individuals employed part time for economic reasons along with discouraged workers who have stopped looking for work. At 11.5 percent, one can see the true nature of the jobs crisis in our country. In October, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 2.9 million.

In addition to the economic woes plaguing Americans every day, the Obama administration routinely employs divisive tactics which degrade America’s unity by extensively leveraging the race card, the alleged “war on women” and amnesty for illegal immigrants — simply to build a dependable voter base.

It’s not surprising Americans feel the way they do. A leader is someone who brings people together. Barack Obama appears to value executive power over a divided nation more than providing leadership to a united one.

leadership 2

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags:

‘Stupidity’ consultant agrees to testify

25 Nov

gruber 2

Jonathan Gruber, the former ObamaCare adviser in hot water for his comments about the “stupidity of the American voter,” has agreed to testify at a House panel next month, setting up a healthcare showdown in what could be the final week of this Congress.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will also hear from Obama administration official Marilyn Tavenner, who is under fire this week for using inflated enrollment figures for the healthcare law.

“Both Mr. Gruber and Administrator Tavenner have agreed to testify,” committee spokeswoman Caitlin Carroll told The Hill. Both figures have played a role in major political headaches for the Obama administration, which is facing new attacks about “repeated transparency failures and outright deceptions” by committee chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).

gruber 1

Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, will be grilled for a number of speeches he has given since 2010 that blame the Obama administration for intentionally obscuring details of the healthcare law in order to assure its passage. Tavenner, who leads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), has taken flak after an investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee revealed last week that ObamaCare enrollment figures had been inflated by nearly 400,000 people.

The administration has been quick to acknowledge that the misreported enrollment count was a mistake, and have defended Tavenner. But hardly any Democrats have stood beside Gruber.

Democrats on the committee are “still considering different options for a minority witness,” according to a Democratic staffer. The hearing, which takes place Dec. 9, will be one of the last for Issa, who has been one of the most vocal critics of the healthcare law. “The American people deserve honesty, transparency and respect from those who forced the federal government into their healthcare. I expect Mr. Gruber and Administrator Tavenner to testify publicly next month about the arrogance and deceptions surrounding the passage and implementation of ObamaCare,” Issa wrote in a statement last week when he announced the hearing.

lie 1

Tags: ,

Mark Caserta: Immigration important to liberal cause

23 Nov

 English-Spanish Signs Front Election Center In Texas

Jul. 17, 2014 @ 12:00 AM

The very sovereignty of the United States and the resolve of the American people to stand firmly upon the principles of our republic are being challenged by the crisis at our southern border.

In the second of my series of columns exposing the progressive movement in our country, we’ll examine the liberal ideology behind their desire to “reform” the immigration policies of the United States.

Many recall President Obama’s first inaugural address in January 2009 when he suggested we must begin “the work of remaking America.” Understand what liberals peddle as “reform” is simply the progressive unraveling of our nation’s laws and redefining them to help propagate the progressive movement. Necessary to this change is reconstructing the very landscape of America’s demographics and gradually whittling away at our constitution.

immigration 1

The United States has a long history of welcoming immigrants from all parts of the world. America values the contributions of immigrants who continue to enrich this country and preserve its legacy as a land of freedom and opportunity.

However, America places no small value on the decision to become a U.S. citizen. To become a citizen you must apply for a “derived” or “acquired” citizenship through parents or apply for naturalization. The process requires a display of commitment to the United States and loyalty to its constitution. Their reward includes the rights and privileges afforded a U.S. citizen.

Integral to this process is “The Immigration and Nationality Act” set in place post-World War II and meant to control immigration into the United States. The law negated exclusion of immigrants based solely upon their country of origin, but protected our nation from those who were unlawful, immoral, diseased, politically radical, etc. and was accepting of those willing to assimilate into the U.S. economic, social and political structure.

US-POLITICS-IMMIGRATION-RALLY

Admittedly, poor enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws has rendered our borders porous far too long. But President Obama’s perceived open-door policy and his subsequent level of neglect of our nation’s borders is unprecedented! Among other things, it represents an unrestricted threat to our national security by anyone willing to exploit our vulnerabilities.

Make no mistake about it. Liberal reform of our nation’s immigration policies would render the current immigration laws null and void and virtually eliminate any incentive for immigrants to naturalize or assimilate into the culture of the United States, thereby having no ownership in its continuance.

But progressives thrive on arbitrary power, not the rule of law. They pursue immigration reform under the guise of humanitarianism while portraying conservatives as prejudiced and outright “haters” simply because we refuse to capitulate to those who would reframe America around their own cancerous liberal theology.

For liberals, bypassing the lawful assimilation of immigrants into the United States, among many potential deleterious effects, adds to a populace dependent upon a government willing to sustain it and devoid of any commitment to the sovereignty of our nation.

But most importantly, it broadens the scope of individuals, void of constitutional acumen, who may be dubiously proselytized into a predacious progressive movement.

US-MEXICO-MIGRATION-REFUGEE

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags:

RECENT HOUSE COMMITTEE FINDING ON BENGHAZI INCONCLUSIVE

23 Nov

No closure or real answers provided

benghazi 1

A friend of mine often says, “You just can’t fix stupid”.

The recent end to a 2-year House Committee hearing on Benghazi simply does not add up. The liberal media is leveraging the fact that the hearing was “GOP controlled” lends credence to the ruling.

Listen, I’m not sure I trust some of the GOP members any more than I do liberals.

benghazi 2

Here are some unanswered questions:

  • Why, on the anniversary of the most tragic terrorist attack on the U.S. would our government NOT have additional security at the Benghazi outpost where we knew Ambassador Stevens was assigned.
  • Are we to believe the brave members of our U.S. security team lied about being held back for 30 minutes before disobeying orders to “stand down” ?
  • Why would the President and his administration continue to blame the obscure anti-Muslim video for the attack even knowing early on that this was a terrorist attack?
  • Why was a “gag order” issued during the investigation.

benghazi first

No, don’t pee down my leg and tell me it’s raining.

The Senate Committee on Benghazi led by Trey Gowdy has only has one hearing thus far.  This isn’t over.

And if in the end, the results prove there was no intentional conspiracy to withhold additional support during the attack, it will still just justify the negligence by this administration in being proactive in protecting our brave men and ambassador who lost their lives – and who administration officials have just written off as casualties of war.

No, you just can’t fix stupid.

OBAMA FOREIGN POLICY

Tags:

How to Rebuke a President

23 Nov

If not impeachment, then what?

Censure-plus.

Dec 1, 2014, Vol. 20, No. 12 • By JAY COST

——————————————————————————————————————————

Cen·sure

 verb: 3rd person present: censures; past tense: censured; past participle: censured; gerund or present participle: censuring

  1. To express severe disapproval of (someone or something), typically in a formal statement.     
  2.  The expression of formal disapproval

For responding to a president who defies his constitutional limits, Congress is said to possess four powers: to impeach, to defund, to investigate, and to withhold confirmation of nominees.

obama censure

Gary Locke

But there is a fifth recourse, which the new Republican Congress might consider in view of President Obama’s executive amnesty for illegal immigrants: the power to censure. In fact, censure could work in tandem with Congress’s other powers, helping the legislature make the moral case for responding to the president’s lawlessness.

Presidential censure is a rare occurrence. Most notably, in 1834, the Whig-controlled Senate censured President Andrew Jackson, a Democrat, for moving federal deposits from the Second Bank of the United States to local banks, derisively called his “pets” because most were operated by loyal Democrats.

Jackson’s legal justification was dubious at best. Under the law, only the secretary of the Treasury could initiate such a transfer, and then only if the funds were deemed insecure. But the Bank had been impeccably run since Nicholas Biddle became its president in 1822. An investigation had ascertained that the funds were perfectly safe, and the House had voted overwhelmingly to affirm that fact. Treasury Secretary William Duane, moreover, refused to remove the money or to step down so Jackson could install somebody who would. Jackson fired Duane, replacing him with Roger Taney without Senate confirmation. Taney’s cronies would go on to grossly mismanage funds in Jackson’s pet bank in Baltimore.

lie 2

This series of actions added up to a severe presidential encroachment. So the Senate—led by Henry Clay and Daniel Webster—censured Jackson by passing this resolution: “Resolved, That the President, in the late Executive proceedings in relation to the public revenue, has assumed upon himself authority and power not conferred by the Constitution and laws, but in derogation of both.”

The censure wounded the president’s bountiful pride, so much so that in 1837, Missouri senator Thomas Hart Benton, a fierce Jackson loyalist, had the resolution stricken from the record.

The facts surrounding Obama’s amnesty of illegal immigrants parallel those of Jackson’s deposit removal scheme. In both instances, we see a president circumventing the traditional and proper constitutional pathways to confer a partisan benefit, creating a dangerous precedent. Jackson had no right to remove deposits that Congress deemed safe; Obama has no right to exempt large classes of people from laws that were duly authorized by the government. Jackson’s actions were meant to rebuke Biddle for supporting Henry Clay for president in 1832 and, later, to supply patronage to pro-Democratic bank managers; Obama’s action is a blatant attempt to curry favor with a sought-after voting bloc and make his partisan opponents look bad in comparison. Both presidents’ unilateral measures admit of no limiting principle; the law is abrogated simply because the president finds it politically inconvenient. If this became a norm, it would destroy our system of government.

gruber 3

Indeed, Clay’s denunciation of Jackson’s deposit removal rings true today: “We are in the midst of a revolution, hitherto bloodless, but rapidly tending toward a total change of the pure republican character of the government, and the concentration of all power in the hands of one man.” Obama, like Jackson before him, seeks to aggrandize the executive branch at the expense of the legislative branch, unbalancing the constitutional regime and justifying censure.

Censure alone, however, would be a meek gesture. Devoid of substance, it would signal legislative impotence; perversely, it might even strengthen Obama’s hand. Something similar happened in 1834 when, after the Senate censured Jackson, nothing changed. The money stayed in the pet banks, and all that Clay really managed to do was offend Jackson’s sense of honor. As historians David and Jeanne Heidler rightly note, “Clay won this battle, but Jackson won the war.”

Thus, censure should be wielded in conjunction with other legitimate legislative powers.

Recent news reports have suggested that Republicans have a plan in mind. As Byron York wrote in the Washington Examiner:

Republicans will work on crafting a new spending measure that funds the entire government, with the exception of the particular federal offices that will do the specific work of enforcing Obama’s order.

Republican sources liken the contemplated action to Congress’s move to stop the president from closing the terrorist detention facility at Guantánamo Bay: In 2009, lawmakers denied Obama the money he would have needed to proceed. Guantánamo remains open.

obama vote 3

Tags: ,

Sign the National Petition to End the Border Crisis Now!

22 Nov

IT’S TIME TO DRAW THE LINE AND PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION!

https://secure.teapartypatriots.org/endthebordercrisis/radio714

hannity levin

“If Congress agrees to fund implementation of Obama’s new executive amnesty, it will encourage more illegals — children AND adults — to take the dangerous route across the border. That’s just wrong.” – Sean Hannity

“Since President Obama took executive action granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, Congressional action is more urgent than ever. We must block implementation of this Constitutional breach. We must secure the borders. Please sign the emergency petition  right now.” – Mark Levin

Sign the petition below for access to our new border crisis documentary, “The Border States of America”!!

. We must block implementation of this Constitutional breach. We must secure the borders. Please sign the emergency petition  right now.” – Mark Levin

Sign the petition below for access to our new border crisis documentary, “The Border States of America”!!

89

Tags: ,

S.H. TOWNSEND: The War on Women – More of a battle for some.

20 Nov

shelleye

This is the 2nd in a series from S.H. Townsend dealing with a conservative woman’s perspective on the “war on women”.

war 4

Is there a war on women? How has it affected me? I have found myself in the midst of battles for which I was unprepared.

It was drilled into my head by my mother’s partner that all men were scum and couldn’t be trusted, but I also came to the conclusion that women couldn’t be trusted. This was after being bullied by my female peers throughout junior high school over, wouldn’t you know it, boys.

I had very few real female friends. I felt like they were all out to hurt each other. I had witnessed it many times, the catty remarks, the backhanded compliments, the unspoken competitions between women, and I didn’t want to participate in any of it. I found most females to be boy crazy. I had no interest in chatting about such insipid topics as men’s bums, or engaging in ridiculous debates about who was the hottest guy, so I became one of the guys.

war on women 1

There were times when my male peers treated like the female that I am. I thought it was chauvinistic and rude, and I chastised them for it. I was woman, hear me roar! My male peers were in fact not really doing anything wrong, but I didn’t see it that way at the time.

One of the biggest battles into which I was thrust was during my first marriage. A huge portion of the battles took place at a church I attended with my first husband, who was probably the king of chauvinists. It wasn’t his fault. His father was a chauvinist, and the church he attended upheld chauvinist beliefs and had absolutely no respect for women. Women were to be seen and not heard. Women were not allowed to make important decisions. Women could play the piano and sing. Women could be Sunday school teachers and worship leaders, but a woman leader? That’s not of God! Women are subject to the men! WOMEN ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SILENT IN CHURCH!

During the last few months of my marriage, my first husband got arrested on a bench warrant. The pastor of the First Church of the Misogynist of Latter Day Saints* (and probably not the last) told me that I had no right to be angry. Of course I was angry! I had to take a day off work and spend money I didn’t have to bail him out of jail!

My marriage was nearing its eventual end. I sought help from the church. I was under the impression that churches were filled with kind people who lived to serve others, because it was what Jesus did during his lifetime. I admitted to the church that my marriage was falling apart.

Throughout my two year attendance, I was told that my husband’s sin was my fault. I didn’t pray or fast enough. I wasn’t a good wife. I did everything I thought a good wife should do. Proverbs 31 was my guide. I did every single one of the things possible to do, but it still wasn’t good enough to save my marriage. I WAS PERFECT, and it was killing me.

I went to the church for help. I told them how I was doing everything in Proverbs 31, and I was told it still wasn’t enough. Upon hearing that statement, I told the pastor if the church refused to help me, I was filing for divorce. The pastor’s response was, “He’s your mule.”

war on women 2

I never agreed to a marriage with a husband who ran the bars and brought other women home. (I felt more hatred toward women because he brought so many into our home.) I pointed out that the vows had broken and I was done. The pastor’s response was, “If you divorce him, you’ll go straight to Hell, and so will any man you marry.” I was beyond the valley of angry. I should have just shut up and left, but the words, “I’ll see you there,” escaped my lips. I left that church and didn’t look back.

Stay tuned for part three, where I will further discuss my experiences on the battlefield.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: Was Obamacare an intentional deception?

20 Nov

It seems that everything about this administration is built around a planned deception of the American people.

 gruber 1

What can we now believe?

Nov. 20, 2014 @ 12:24 AM

Evidence is rapidly developing that suggests the lies about Obamacare which helped pass the law and get President Obama elected were premeditated.

Economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the Obama administration’s consultants on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), is under attack for comments he made last year in which he said the “stupidity of the American voter” was a key factor in passing Obamacare in 2010.

Gruber’s impartation regarding the president’s signature health care law emerged in a video taken at the Annual Health Economics Conference last year.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes,” he said during a panel discussion at the University of Pennsylvania in October 2013. “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the ‘stupidity of the American voter’ or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

gruber 2

Gruber said he regretted making the comments last Tuesday during an on-air interview with MSNBC’s Ronan Farrow. But even as Gruber apologized, subsequent videos began to surface adding veracity to Gruber’s remarks acknowledging the administration’s “lack of transparency” in the legislative process.

“You can’t do it politically. You just literally cannot do it, okay, transparent financing and also transparent spending.” Gruber said. “In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in you made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed, okay.”

In a very telling fourth video Gruber not only insults the American people but portrays President Obama as being complicit in misleading Americans.

obama climate 2

“Barack Obama’s not a stupid man, okay?” Gruber said in a college talk at Holy Cross in March 2010. “He knew when he was running for president that quite frankly the American public doesn’t actually care that much about the uninsured. What the American public cares about is costs.”

And indeed, the president kept Americans focused on the “affordability” of his health care debacle.

As a candidate in 2008, Barack Obama repeatedly said his healthcare plan would reduce the typical family’s annual premiums by up to $2,500 per year. Often, he didn’t include the disclaimer “up to,” simply saying the “typical” family would save about $2,500 a year on premiums. Yet, this promise, as so many others, did not come to fruition for Americans.

And last Friday, just hours before the health insurance marketplace was to open to buyers seeking insurance for 2015, the Obama administration unveiled data showing that many Americans with health insurance plans purchased under the ACA could face up to 20 percent increases in their premiums unless they switch plans!

I believe these were calculated deceptions which changed the course of American history. Obamacare and very likely the election of Barack Obama would never have happened if the American people had known the truth.

gruber 3

As a result, Democrat leadership and this president have stained American history, forged a legacy of deceit, and lost all credibility with the American people.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: ,

OBAMA MAKES HIS MOVE ON IMMIGRATION

19 Nov

Emperor Obama tests his executive power

I 1

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a broad test of his executive powers, President Barack Obama declared Wednesday he will sidestep Congress and order his own federal action on immigration — in measures that could spare from deportation as many as 5 million people illegally in the U.S. and set up one of the most pitched partisan confrontations of his presidency.

Obama declared that Washington has allowed America’s immigration problem “to fester for too long.”

The president will use an 8 p.m. EST address Thursday to announce his measures and will sign the executive actions during a rally in Las Vegas on Friday. In doing so, Obama will be taking an aggressive stand that he had once insisted was beyond his presidential power.

As many as 5 million people in the country illegally are likely to be protected from deportation and made eligible for work permits under the plan. They would not have a path to citizenship, however, and the actions could be reversed by a new president in two years. Officials said the eligible immigrants would not be entitled to federal benefits — including health care tax credits — under Obama’s plan.

The 5 million estimate includes extending deportation protections to parents and spouses of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for five years. The president also is likely to expand his 2-year-old program that protects young immigrants from deportation. The administration had considered extending the executive action to parents of young immigrants covered under the 2012 Obama directive, but immigration advocates said they did not expect the parents to be included in the final plan.

“What I’m going to be laying out is the things that I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system better, even as I continue to work with Congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill that can solve the entire problem,” Obama said in a video on Facebook.

I 2

Laying the groundwork for his actions, Obama invited 18 Democratic members of the House and Senate — but no Republicans — to dinner at the White House on Wednesday. Among the networks airing his Thursday speech will be Univision, which will interrupt the Latin Grammys to carry his remarks, assuring him a huge Spanish-speaking audience. The major broadcast networks — ABC, CBS and NBC — were not planning to air the speech, but cable news networks were.

Obama is to speak at Las Vegas’ Del Sol High School on Friday, a school with a large population of non-English speaking students where Obama unveiled his blueprint for comprehensive immigration legislation in 2013.

Republicans vehemently oppose the president’s likely actions but are deeply divided and have spent much of the week intensely debating how to respond. Some conservative members have threatened to pursue a government shutdown and one — two-term Republican Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama — raised the specter of impeachment on Wednesday.

House Speaker John Boehner’s spokesman criticized Obama’s planned announcement, noting that the president himself had said in the past that he was not “emperor” and was limited in his ability to act.

“If ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his constitutional authority, he will cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for congressional action on this issue — and many others,” the spokesman, Michael Steel, said.

A wide-ranging immigration bill passed the Senate last year, but stalled in the Republican-led House. Senate Democratic leaders on Wednesday took turns declaring their support for Obama’s unilateral action, blaming Republican inaction for forcing Obama to act.

I 3

“There’s one more chance: Just put the bill on the floor, Speaker Boehner,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., a lead author of the bill that passed the Senate. “Pass the bill and we will not even have to debate executive action.”

Even Republicans who supported the Senate bill that would have overhauled immigration laws said Obama’s go-it-alone approach would backfire. Still, they cautioned their party colleagues not to overreach in their response.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who worked on the Senate legislation, said the executive actions would leave the status of millions of immigrants unresolved and would not address what he called a broken immigration system.

“Our response has to be measured — can’t capitulate, can’t overreact,” he said. “Impeachment or shutting down the entire government would be an unwise move.”

Adjustments also are expected to a 2012 program that allowed immigrants under 31 who had arrived before June 2007 to apply for a reprieve from deportation and a work permit. More than 600,000 young immigrants have been shielded from deportation to date under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Removing the upper age limit so that applicants don’t have to be under 31 — one option under consideration — would make an additional 200,000 people eligible.

In one specific example, about 250,000 farm workers in the United States illegally would receive work permits under Obama’s actions, according to Giev Kashkooli, the national political legislative director of the United Farm Workers who met with White House officials and with Obama on Wednesday. The UFW had been hoping for a specific program that would provide work permits to more farm workers.

The 250,000 farm workers would be eligible by being parents of children who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

The beneficiaries of Obama’s new executive action would be treated in the same manner as those immigrants who were shielded from deportation in his 2012 directive, according to one official who discussed the limits of Obama’s action on the condition of anonymity, lacking authority to speak on the record at this point.

I 4

Those young immigrants covered by the 2012 action can obtain work permits but are not eligible for food stamps, federal welfare benefits or disability benefits under the Supplemental Security Income program. They also are ineligible for tax credits under Obama’s health care law, though they can buy health coverage at full price on the exchanges created by the law. They may be eligible for public benefits provided by some states.

Tags: ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →