Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 20, 2014, 11:20:59 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
83729 Posts in 2261 Topics by 1067 Members
Latest Member: Shinobi Dog
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 124
51  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2 minute video sums up Administration of His Glibness on: December 03, 2014, 11:04:30 AM
(The people of Louisiana already know Mary Landrieu votes with him 97% of the time.)

It's 2 minutes.  Watch the video!
52  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Immigration, Congress has options to answer Obama’s dishonest executive amnesty on: December 03, 2014, 10:48:39 AM
Eastman answers Crafty's challenge:

"...would give lawful status to the millions of people who are  beneficiaries of the new policy, and afford to them work authorization and other benefits that are specifically prohibited by U.S. law."

"there are few areas of constitutional authority that are more clearly vested in the Congress than determinations of immigration and naturalization policy.  The Supreme Court has routinely described Congress’s power in this area as “plenary,” that is, an unqualified and absolute power."

"...lawfully authorized workers displaced by those to whom Obama has unlawfully extended work authorization have the kind of particularized injury that would give them legal standing to challenge the new policy.  Workers compensation insurance carriers, too, might be able to challenge the policy, which forces them to extend coverage to those not legally able to work. "

Funny(?) that the previous action applies to CHILDREN up to the age of 35!

Congress has options to answer Obama’s dishonest executive amnesty
By John C. Eastman

The president’s statement on November 20, 2014 contained several outright falsehoods.  More significantly, masked behind the discussion over prosecutorial discretion is a flagrant violation of the Constitution’s core separation of powers principle that Congress, not the president, makes the law. 

First the lies, damn lies, and statistics.  President Obama said that deportations are up over 80 percent.  Truth be told, his administration has manipulated the definition of “deportation” in order to make that claim.  Those caught and turned away at the border are now included in the total, whereas before they were not.  Comparing apples to apples, the Los Angeles Times reported last April that deportations are down by more than 40 percent since Obama first took office, and the New York Times reported that there was a 26 percent drop in deportations in fiscal year 2013 alone.

Obama also claimed that “The actions I’m taking are not only lawful, they’re the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican president and every single Democratic President for the past half century.”  False again. 
Presidents routinely exercise prosecutorial discretion in individual cases because they seldom have the resources to enforce every minor violation of the law.  But rarely has a President engaged in such a wholesale, categorical non-enforcement of the law as Obama did two years ago with the so-called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program (which was available to anyone up to the age of 35!), and now the massively expanded program announced on November 20. 

The president’s largest whopper was this:  “Now, let’s be clear about what [the new program] isn’t. . . . It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive—only Congress can do that. All we’re saying is we’re not going to deport you.”

Not true by a long shot.  Non-deportation alone would be an exercise of prosecutorial discretion, even if wholesale, categorical non-enforcement pushes the limits of that doctrine beyond the breaking point.  But Obama’s new directive (which was not even issued as an executive order, but merely a “memo” from the Secretary of Homeland Security) would give lawful status to the millions of people who are  beneficiaries of the new policy, and afford to them work authorization and other benefits that are specifically prohibited by U.S. law.   

As the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service announced with respect to the predecessor DACA program, “An individual who has received deferred action is authorized by DHS to be present in the United States, and is therefore considered by DHS to be lawfully present during the period of deferred action is in effect.”  That’s why hundreds of thousands of DACA applicants were deemed to have “legal status,” obtain work authorization, and also obtain driver’s licenses (which were then used to open the door to a host of other benefits available only to citizens and those with lawful permanent residence).  The new program will expand that number to millions, perhaps tens of millions.

Obama was right about one thing:  “Only Congress can do that.”  Indeed, there are few areas of constitutional authority that are more clearly vested in the Congress than determinations of immigration and naturalization policy.  The Supreme Court has routinely described Congress’s power in this area as “plenary,” that is, an unqualified and absolute power. 

But Obama went ahead and did it anyway.  Contradicting even his own express statements over the past four years that he did not have the constitutional authority to do this.

Congress is not without constitutional checks on a president who abuses the powers of his office.  It has the power of the purse, and it can use that power to prohibit the expenditure of funds for carrying out the president’s dictate to extend work authorization to those not lawfully authorized to work. 

And there may be litigation strategies that can be employed, as well.  For example, lawfully authorized workers displaced by those to whom Obama has unlawfully extended work authorization have the kind of particularized injury that would give them legal standing to challenge the new policy.  Workers compensation insurance carriers, too, might be able to challenge the policy, which forces them to extend coverage to those not legally able to work. 

Whatever path is pursued, it is critical that this constitutional crisis not go unanswered; the rule of law itself is at stake.

Eastman is the Henry Salvatori Professor of Law & Community Service at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law, the director of the Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, and the chairman of the Federalist Society’s Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group.
53  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues, Time Person of the Year ... on: December 02, 2014, 11:48:19 PM
Time Person of the Year will be the Ferguson inspired rioters.  This is a prediction not an announcement.  (

Time Person of the Year should be - the lead engineer on fracking.  Or maybe the incoming Republican Senate.  Or:  the new prime minister of India.
54  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Morons:Drilling for oil won't lower gas/oil prices, CNN Money, 2011 on: December 02, 2014, 11:31:20 PM

We were right and they were wrong, but they learned nothing from it and will continue on with biased and ignorant reporting.  The msm won't provide as simple an economic axiom as increasing supply puts downward pressure on price.  We have to compete with only facts and truth on our side.  No mainstream amplifier.

It was the same argument made against ANWR production.  New supplies will be too little to make an impact on a global market and will take 10 years to affect market prices anyway, 15 years ago.  But it doesn't take 10 years to affect a futures market!  Further on energy, they could go back and discover that keystone XL would have been a good move 6 years ago, with a positive ripple effect throughout the economy and the safest way to move what we are already transporting and using.  

For the most part, you have to go to a conservative site to learn a fact that disrupts a liberal media talking point.
55  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The US Congress; Congressional races on: December 02, 2014, 09:17:07 PM
Sen. Joe Mancin of WV may be tempted to flip to the Reps.

I hope you are right.  If it was only personal Washington power at stake, or if you are looking from anywhere except WV it makes perfect sense, he ran against Obama and the Dem party agenda, but according to this Redstate piece, Joe Manchim IS the Democratic party of West Virginia.

When he looks at Mary Landrieu abandoned to obscurity in Louisiana, among other things. conservative Dems in WV should see that all need to flip.

It would be a BIG deal, making the Republicans +10 for the year, Democrats -10! (By my count.)   If they aren't offering him committee assignments and prime offices, they should be.
56  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Congressional races - Mary Landrieu, Under the Bus on: December 02, 2014, 07:51:42 PM
Chris Cillizza, Washington Post today,  "You'd be hard-pressed to find a single Democrat in Washington not named "Landrieu" even talking about the race and even fewer (if that's possible) who think she has any chance at winning."

Longtime aide to former Louisiana Sen. John Breaux (D),  "I don’t know anyone outside of her staff who thinks she has a chance to win next Saturday".

This lost dog has only the Humane Society backing her now.  (Not joking.)

Previously, in this thread:  "Goodbye Mary Landrieu.  The Republican takeover will now jump to +9.  Dem losses are -9.  Net shift in votes is 18.  And the margin is high enough for Republicans to have a good shot of retaining control in the next, much harder cycle."

I don't get how you quit.  How does Obama give up? Ok, she doesn't want him there, but why don't they send money?  (The answer is because they all know she can't win.)  Why do they say this is about money?  She is a 12 year incumbent!  She can get a message out - if she had one.  Elect me and I will ... what?  Lol.  People already heard her message and saw her results of their policies.  Why doesn't Hillary care?  (No pun intended.)  Aren't they the crowned royalty of fundraising?  They can't find a couple mil?  Or they won't?!  Has Hillary conceded the Senate for the next 6 years?  How do you govern without the Senate, get everyone from cabinet to Supreme Court appointments confirmed, treaties ratified, budgets passed?  Ask Barack Obama about the fun of divided government.  There is nothing Hillary can or will do right now to win these key seat in this key state.  Or is this her best?  She is just too boxed in with failure.  Maybe Hillary isn't running either!  Maybe this was her last stand:

I'll bet you Hillary is not booked to go down for the 'victory' party.  Mary will enjoy that one without the Obama, Clinton machines.
57  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Race, Ferguson, Bill Whittle on: December 02, 2014, 10:19:56 AM
A different look at race than Obama, Holder see.
58  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Media Morons:Drilling for oil won't lower gas/oil prices, CNN Money, 2011 on: December 02, 2014, 10:11:24 AM
Cognitive Dissonance of the Left, Economic Illiteracy and Media Issues, all one in the same!

This is under NEWS, not opinion!

Adding to the supply won't lower the price?  Why not?  Worst case doesn't it lower the future price increases - which is lowering the price!

"The United States simply doesn't have enough oil to move world markets. Plus, any increase would be offset by OPEC."  Huh?  Wouldn't it be the opposite.  They have to produce more yet to get the same revenue or profit.

Gas Prices
Drill baby drill won't lower gas prices

The United States simply doesn't have enough oil to move world markets. Plus, any increase would be offset by OPEC.

By Steve Hargreaves, senior writer April 25, 2011: 11:22 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Every time gas prices reach record highs the call goes out for more oil drilling. This year it's no different.

The problem is this: While increased oil and gas drilling in the United States may create good-paying jobs, reduce reliance on foreign oil and lower the trade deficit, it will have hardly any impact on gas and oil prices.

That's because the amount of extra oil that could be produced from more drilling in this country is tiny compared to what the world consumes.

59  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / How to Replace Obamacare on: December 01, 2014, 10:17:51 AM
The starting point for a full replacement plan should be a rational synthesis of the two best reform plans now on the table: one developed by the 2017 Project (a group dedicated to developing a conservative reform agenda for the next administration) and the other by Republican Senators Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, and Orrin Hatch. The two plans share much in common. They are practical, market-based solutions. They both retain the employer-based health-insurance system for the vast majority of Americans, even as they would encourage more cost discipline in the most expensive job-based plans with a limitation on the federal tax break for employer-paid premiums. To broaden insurance enrollment and to correct an inequity in current law, they also would provide a new federal tax credit to households without access to employer coverage. The credit would be adjusted by age (and, in the case of Burr-Coburn-Hatch, by income) and could be used to purchase any state-approved health-insurance product. Finally, the plans would create a new “continuous-coverage protection” construct: People who stay continuously enrolled in health insurance would be protected from premium hikes based on their health status and from exclusions from coverage based on a preexisting condition.
— James C. Capretta, AEI

2017 Project:

Burr, Coburn, Hatch:
60  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / IBD on the House Intel Benghazi report on: December 01, 2014, 10:06:17 AM
Strange that the House panel report has Republicans vindicating perhaps Hillary while not believing the story of the eyewitnesses on the ground.  When the truth finally gets sorted out, the ones who failed to act will point back to this report for cover.  I'm all for the truth; I doubt if this is it.  IBD lays out how this report makes no sense.

House Intel Benghazi Report A Lie Agreed Upon

Scandal: The Benghazi annex security team that fought on the building's rooftop to save its lives and those of others begs to differ with the House Intelligence Committee claim that there was no stand-down order.

To say that Kris Paronto, Mark Geist and John Tiegen, three CIA contractors who on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, battled with terrorists from the roof of the CIA's Benghazi annex building, do not agree with conclusions of the House Intelligence Committee report released Friday is putting it mildly. In a tweet, Paronto called the report "a pile of crap."

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham was equally eloquent during an interview on CNN's "State of the Union," agreeing the report was "full of crap."

"I know Benghazi pretty well," he said Sunday. "I don't think that the report is accurate."

Neither do we, for it flies in the face of testimony from the three CIA operators and Gregory Hicks, U.S. deputy chief of mission in Libya, who were on the ground in Libya on that fateful night.

The report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, chaired by Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., said the committee "found no evidence that there was either a stand-down order or a denial of available air support." Yet Paronto and his teammates who were there tell a quite different story.

Paronto and Geist appeared on C-Span's Book TV on Saturday along with Tiegen, who remained off-camera. During the interview, a caller from Sanford, Fla., accused the trio — as Rep Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who sits on the committee, has done — of lying about what happened to boost sales of their book.

"Ma'am," Paronto said, "during the House Intel subcommittee I looked at Mike Rogers in the eye and I said, 'If we would have not been delayed, which we were delayed three times — (I have no doubt) that we would have saved the ambassador's life and Sean Smith's life.' "

Paronto added: "Why he came out with the report, I don't know what to tell you on that. You're going to have to ask him. What we said in the book is what happened on the ground, and that is the truth."

To believe the committee report, we'd have to believe Paronto, Geist and Tiegen are liars. Somehow we don't think so. "All we're going to do is keep telling what actually happened that night," Paronto told the C-Span caller. That's all we can ask, even if the old boy network in Washington is unwilling to listen.
61  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, T. Sowell on Scott Walker on: December 01, 2014, 09:48:38 AM
Written just before the election:

"Except for Congressional elections, the most important election this year is the close race for governor of Wisconsin. Governor Scott Walker has shown that he has substance and guts, rather than image and rhetoric, by opposing the government employee unions that have been bleeding the taxpayers. He would make a far better Republican presidential candidate in 2016 than Congressional phrase-makers or a retreaded candidate who lost in 2012."
   - Thomas Sowell,  Oct 28,2014

[Walker won the so-called blue state by nearly 6%]
62  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Economic Wisdom, Thomas Sowell on: December 01, 2014, 09:41:07 AM
Too many intellectuals are too impressed with the fact that they know more than other people. Even if an intellectual knows more than anybody else, that is not the same as saying that he knows more than everybody else put together — which is what would be needed to justify substituting his judgment for that expressed by millions of others through the market...
63  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Foreign Policy: 31% approve on: November 30, 2014, 05:17:05 PM
64  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 30, 2014, 04:30:30 PM
ccp:  "we should be making a better case how this is NOT about those from Latino countries."

That's right.  But Democrats are winning 71% of the Asian American vote by keeping this issue on the front burner as well:

"the increased competition hurts those here more than it helps"

The increased supply of low skill, low wage workers lowers the wage and raises the unemployment for the existing workers, all other things held constant.  Working class whites get that.  Working class minorities should be persuadable on this point. 

A sane and logical immigration policy would bring in a manageable flow of workers with a balance of different skills and different places of origin.   America by design is a melting pot, E pluribus unum.    America under Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Jarret and the gang is something entirely different, politically warring groups fighting to divide up the spoils of the all-powerful, crony, redistributive system.

I look forward to Crafty's legal answer as to why this executive order is different, why it is unconstitutional.  In the meantime, suffice it to say that Obama's actions are ANTI-constitutional, clearly designed to work against the intentions and written meanings of the constitution.  Crafty also has written about how people learn in different ways other than simple logic.  The SNL skit (already posted) reaches more persuadable voters than the technical points sought:

From the constitution:
"Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization ….”  And it is the president’s constitutional duty, under Article II, Section 3, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed ….”

   - If people see wiggle room in that, it is because they want to see wiggle room in that, not because the articles and laws were written unworkably ambiguous.

"Worse than Nixon."  - George Will (before this action)
journalists did not ask the pertinent question: “Where does the Constitution confer upon presidents the ‘executive authority’ to ignore the separation of powers by revising laws?” The question could have elicited an Obama rarity: brevity. Because there is no such authority.

"a monarch decrees, dictates, and rules through fiat power"
    - Alexander Hamilton,  Federalist 69

26 Violations of Law by the Obama Administration ( overlaps the issues of immigration and unconstitutional as well as failing to faithfully enforce the laws, such as the 2006 Security Fence Act):  This law requires that "at least two layers of reinforced fencing" be built along America's 650-mile border with Mexico. So far, just 40 miles of this fence have been built – most of it during the Bush Administration.   - Anyone, please point out the wiggle room in that Congressional Act.

President Obama's Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013
We are SHOUTING this because it keeps happening!

Crafty:  Some random thoughts, (not in his order)

"c) Have a think tank do some serious work on drafting and alternative to birth babies bootstrapping their parents into America."

   - Hard to believe this isn't done and ready to go.  One example below, I see that Harry Reid proposed exactly that in 1993!
In the exercise of its powers under section 5 of the Fourteenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Congress has determined and hereby declares that any person born after the date of enactment of this title to a mother who is neither a citizen of the United States nor admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident, and which person is a national or citizen of another country of which either of his or her natural parents is a national or citizen, or is entitled upon application to become a national or citizen of such country, shall be considered as born subject to the jurisdiction of that foreign country and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of section 1 of such Article and shall therefore not be a citizen of the United States or of any State solely by reason of physical presence within the United States at the moment of birth.

"b) Specify criteria to define if/when the border is secure."

   - Yes, and then require something like a 3 year delay to follow compliance, ensuring the criteria is truly and permanently met, before changing any of the legal status sought for millions.

"d) As a political matter and a human kindness matter I suspect there will be some people for whom amnesty is a fair call.  Newt Gingrich, tried making this point during the FL debates with his comments about not deporting Grandma after 20 years, but Romney mugged him from the right.  The point remains, at some point it will be a good call to apply some sort of statute of limitations concept."

   - Yes, there needs to be some concession on this from Republicans, with a delay after the other requirements are met.  (BTW, this is a reason to not take Romney fully at his word.  His positions are politically strategic more than principled.  This is one too many flip flops for my taste, and still needs to make one more on government mandated healthcare insurance.)

"e) keep alive the distinction between work papers and citizenship."

   - This is part of the trap that is set.  Dems are deeming legalization without citizenship, while they compare legal and not eligible to vote - with slavery.  The only distinction being that I think it was Democrats who supported slavery!

"a) Pass a bill with enough funding to fg deport all eleven million.  Specify that all 11M are to be deported, period.  If not, specify who not-- e.g. do we really want to deport someone who came here as a baby and has lived here essentially all his life and thinks of himself as an American?"

   - This is more of the trap set for Republicans by the Dems.  If you don't do this, then his action is justified, it is argued.  If you do, then you lose the votes of Hispanics, Asian Americans, etc. forever.

Ask Marco Rubio, you don't just step forward honestly and negotiate in good faith with these people.  Instead, you set your own traps along the way for them.  Call votes that put them on the spot, such as fixing birthright misinterpretation, funding the fence, setting up employment verification, etc.  How about holding hearings on the economic effect on low age Americans of having all these people entering?  And reach these people on other issues at the same time.

You cannot have a real solution while the Gruberized President is in charge of the enforcement apparatus.  JMHO
65  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues - He Changed the Law on: November 28, 2014, 05:26:17 PM
Crafty poses a tough challenge. 

"I am still waiting for a response to the OLC's arguments justifying the EO."

Previously:  "The standard he cites is not FDR, but the APA and SCOTUS decisions."

From the piece:  "Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which has served ever since as the legal charter of the modern administrative state."

   - There isn't an act of a congress, from 80 years ago or any other time, that changes the constitution and the relationship between the branches of government contained in it.

"the Supreme Court ... Heckler v. Chaney,... In a decision joined by seven other justices, Justice William Rehnquist noted that, “This Court has recognized on several occasions over many years that an agency’s decision not to prosecute or enforce, whether through civil or criminal process, is a decision generally committed to an agency’s absolute discretion.” "

   - Generally?  Absolute??  Really??!?  My guess is that he referring to enforcement of individual cases, not to changing the entire immigration system or things like the EPA writing new laws or changing existing ones.

Eric Holder's OLC:  "This discretion is rooted in the President’s constitutional duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,”

   - Yes it is!  This isn't a case of an executive not having the resources to enforce the law, in spite of the numbers you cite, 11 million illegals and only funding to allow deportation of 400,000 per year.  That was the limitation BEFORE this executive order.  The point of the executive order is described in the President's own statement, "I changed the law".  He is declaring his intent to NOT faithfully execute the law.  This was NOT a mis-speak.  The speech in question had 91 1st person references in it, I, me, my, while the relevant articles of the constitution refer to specific roles for the House, Senate, and President, and back to the House and Senate for super-majorities when the different branches are not in agreement.  The constitution gives the Legislative branch power to over-ride the Executive to make law, but not vice versa!

I know you are looking for a technical argument to explain how this is different from all other executive orders and over-reaches, and the related Supreme Court cases, but one more incremental expansion of these encroachments becomes unconstitutional whenever a challenge makes it to the Court and 5 Justices deem what the President already admitted, he [effectively] changed the law.

In the meantime, this is a political matter to be tried in the court of public opinion.  People see this for what it is, one person making or changing law in defiance of the constitutional process.  See the SNL skit, and see the Obama statement mentioned.

"Right now the Reps are getting maneuvered into supporting breaking up families with American children and illegal alien parents." 

   - Republicans were not deporting more illegals than Obama.  And if they returned minors crossing the border to their families, and/or made the proposal to "fix" the 14th amendment right now, they would be on record as opposing the further breakup of families caused by our broken system.  How about taking positive actions rather than always reacting to the Ayers and Pliven agenda?

"... this becomes yet another case where the Reps are seen as meanies."

   - There isn't really a way around that without abandoning the rule of law.  I admired Marco Rubio's attempt to engage the other side and solve this, but no one liked the results that came out of that.  I also asked here, just before the executive order, what would comprise a good comprehensive bill from our point of view.  Now the ball is in the President's court because he took it.  We can box him in but we don't have a simple way to solve this IMHO.
66  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 28, 2014, 10:45:41 AM
Obama is working at reducing the numbers of all working people.

True.  That cuts both ways politically.  People may want to vote to protect benefits, but may want to vote for better opportunities for their offspring.  Obama couldn't run on his agenda again - now that it is fully exposed.  Decreasing workforce opportunities isn't what made Bill Clinton appear successful.  Quite the opposite.  I fail to see how some old, white, rich Grandma is going to excite minorities, young people, or working whites about their prospects for the future continuing the same, failed policies.

If you and your family really are dependent on government benefits, you should vote for the side that will grow the economy and revenues that fund our support system.
67  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, Why Gallup poll signals trouble for Hillary on: November 28, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
With all the focus on chasing Black and Hispanic votes, sometime they forget to pursue the other demographics, like white, working people. 

"Obama’s approval rating has dropped 13 points among college-educated whites, but a remarkable 21 points among the non-college educated. Why the difference?

(We aren't talking about people who hate Obama and all Democrats, we are talking about people who initially supported him.)

The Obama administration has been bad for higher-income Americans, but not disastrous. Quantitative easing has re-inflated the stock market, and middle-aged “knowledge workers” have suffered less than other groups. But for the working class, there is nothing good to be said about Obamanomics: high unemployment, a scarcity of full-time work, skyrocketing prices of food and fuel, more expensive health care, anemic economic growth, and wage decline caused in part by competition with unprecedented numbers of legal and illegal immigrants. What’s to like? Nothing."

When Hillary runs in 2016 as the heir of Obama’s liberal economic and immigration policies, she will not have [Obama's] built-in advantage with minorities. There is no reason why any substantial number of working-class people, white or minority, would wish for another four years of Obama’s policies. Nor–to put it delicately–is there anything about Hillary’s persona that will endear her to the majority of such voters.

...expect a backlash against Obama’s economic and immigration policies in 2016 that will take pundits–not to mention Hillary–by surprise."

John Hinderacker, Powerline
68  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Pilgrims' earliest communal farming failed miserably, private property succeeded on: November 28, 2014, 09:43:08 AM
William Bradford, Governor of the Plymouth Colony, reports that, at that time, he and his advisers considered “how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery.” And “after much debate of things,” he then adds, they chose to abandon communal property, deciding that “they should set corn every man for his own particular” and assign “to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end.”

The results, he tells us, were gratifying in the extreme, “for it made all hands very industrious” and “much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.” Even “the women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.”

Moreover, he observes, “the experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years . . . amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times . . . that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing.” In practice, America’s first socialist experiment “was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.”

Professor Paul Rahe, writing at Powerline, 2009
69  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Illegal immigrants will receive Social Security, Medicare under Obama Action on: November 28, 2014, 09:23:17 AM
I need Gomer Pyle's accent to properly say:  Well surprise!  Surprise!  Surprise!

Who saw this coming?

Washington Post, Nov 25, 2014

Illegal immigrants could receive Social Security, Medicare [and everything else] under Obama action

Under President Obama’s new program to protect millions of illegal immigrants from deportation, many of those affected will be eligible to receive Social Security, Medicare and a wide array of other federal benefits, a White House official said Tuesday.
70  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Romney swallows amnesty on: November 28, 2014, 09:08:14 AM

I think we can say at this point, Romney is running for President.  In some ways he is the strongest candidate.  In a few crucial areas, he is not.  One is Romneycare/Obamacare, and with that, the tie with Gruber. 

Now he would like to reverse course on amnesty.  How about telling us what changed since "self-deportation"?  He has already reversed course too many times.  He has too much ability to say what different people want to hear, in Massachusetts, in Republican primaries, and in a general election, and not enough adherence to principles for my taste.

What Republican strategy is that, to do it exactly Obama's way, give him credit, solve nothing and get nothing in return?
71  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 28, 2014, 08:56:28 AM
" accuse Obama of screwing up immigration and move on to other things"

Non starter for me.

To clarify, nothing positive is going to happen in the next two years on immigration.  The President proved himself unable to negotiate in good faith.  

On November 4th Republicans won a wave election.  The President and his party were shellacked, or whatever term people want to use.  Ever since, we have been on defense, because that is his strategy.

Shouldn't it be the other way around?  He is governing this country into an economic, cultural and strategic ash-heap.  We should be on offense and he should be on defense, IMHO.

What about holding hearings on the enforcement and implementation of the last immigration law passed by congress?  He says the fence is built, yet infants and children are walking through?

Moving on would also follow passage in congress of the constitutional amendment.  Move that debate to the states for action.  

A debate that centers on the plight of the people already here, when no one is sending them home anyway, favors him.
72  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Dr. Ben Carson on immigration, Sticking to the rule of law isn’t heartless on: November 28, 2014, 08:37:16 AM
Like many Americans, I appreciate the plight of billions of people throughout the world who would like nothing more than to find themselves in the United States, where they could enjoy a much higher standard of living and wonderful opportunities for advancement.

It certainly seems like a compassionate thing to offer them legal status in America and the opportunity to pursue their dreams. It should first be considered, however, that we have millions of people already mired in dire poverty in our inner cities, rural townships, and places such as Appalachia who would certainly appreciate a helping hand before we extend one to foreigners. The same principle is seen when you board an airplane and hear the announcement, “In case of an emergency, oxygen masks will drop from the ceiling. Put yours on first, and then administer help to those around you.” There are many around us already in need of help.

According to President Obama, only those 5 million or so illegals who have been in America for five years or more will benefit from his largesse. He indicates that they will not be eligible for health care and other benefits. Obviously, this fits right into the same category as his promise: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”
Once illegals have legal status, it will be difficult to deny them any of the multitudinous entitlements that are freely distributed throughout our society. Also, we must remember that illegals who have been here for less than five years only have to claim that they have been here longer than that in order to collect goodies. In effect, instead of helping 5 million people, we probably will be aiding at least twice that many.

Even this would not be a problem if we had plenty of money, but the sad fact is our national debt is approaching $18 trillion. If you paid that back at a rate of $1 billion per day, it would take nearly 50 years. Many powerful nations before us have met their fate through fiscal irresponsibility. What makes our leaders think we are immune from the destructive forces of a shaky financial foundation?

The founders of our nation feared that the time would arise when an individual or group of individuals in our government would become intoxicated with their power and attempt to impose their will upon the entire society through dictatorial decrees rather than through the legal process established by our Constitution. For this reason, they established three separate but equal branches of government, dividing the powers. This ingenious method of power division worked beautifully until recently, but one hopes we are about to experience a demonstration of how the separation of powers preserves the integrity of our system. It will require that the legislative and judicial branches of government manifest the necessary courage to stand up for the people they represent.

The American people should not be manipulated into believing that they are heartless simply because they want to preserve the rule of law in our nation and look after their own before they take in others. We also have to consider the millions of people who have immigrated here legally, as well as those who are in the queue. It is incredibly unfair to them to grant amnesty to those who have jumped ahead of them in line illegally. I hope all of our government officials will recall the words of the Pledge of Allegiance, with particular emphasis on the part that says: “with liberty and justice for all.”
73  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 28, 2014, 12:20:16 AM
Agreeing with Obj on this point, this President isn't going to do any more enforcement over the rest of his term than what they were doing the first 6 years.  I can't see how any bill with any language changes that.  What are we going to do if he ignores the next law, sue him, de-fund him, impeach him, just like we aren't doing now?

One thing Republicans could pass is the 14th Amendment fix to end the misinterpretation of anchor babies.  That does not go to Obama desk.  If passed by the House and Senate, it goes the the state legislatures.

To give an 'anchor baby' citizenship is to break up a family, assuming we intend to enforce laws in the future.  Let them apply as a family in the normal line.

Obama is approaching this piecemeal; so can the Republicans. 

If certain actions and results must come before amnesty, such as the amendment, a fence, an airtight visa system, an employer verification system, then get started on those first.

If we don't favor full, unconditional amnesty, then require the President to rescind his executive order before negotiations begin on a comprehensive bill.  He won't do it. 

Other things Republicans can do:  accuse Obama of screwing up immigration and move on to other things.  Pass the economic agenda now that we should run on in 2016.  Let him veto, and then run on it.  Fry the administration on IRS targeting, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Obamacare, and every other lie.  Hold hearings on the results of previous programs, cash for clunkers, crony solyndra governmentism,  shovel ready jobs, dismantling of the workforce, epidemic of disability and food assistance claims, dual mission Fed, government's role in mortgages, etc.
74  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Government programs, spending: Our GIANT Welfare State on: November 26, 2014, 12:06:59 PM
Forgotten in all of this is how much these programs harm their recipients!
"We have the world’s second-largest welfare state — just behind France."

Our giant welfare state
By Robert J. Samuelson  November 25   Washington Post

We Americans pride ourselves on not having a “welfare state.” We’re not like Europeans. We’re more individualistic and self-reliant, and although we may have a “social safety net” to protect people against unpredictable personal and societal tragedies, we explicitly repudiate a comprehensive welfare state as inherently un-American.

Dream on.

Call it a massive case of national self-deception. Indeed, judged by how much of their national income countries devote to social spending, we have the world’s second-largest welfare state — just behind France.

This is not just conjecture. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) — a group of wealthy nations — has recently published new figures on government social spending. Covered is unemployment insurance, disability payments, old-age assistance, government-provided health care, family allowances and the like. By this measure alone, the United States is hardly a leader. It ranks 23rd in the world with social spending of roughly 19 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). This is slightly below the OECD average of 22 percent. France is the champ at nearly 32 percent. (The data are generally the latest available, including some estimates for 2014.)

But wait. Direct government spending isn’t the only way that societies provide social services. They also channel payments through private companies, encouraged, regulated and subsidized by government. This is what the United States does, notably with employer-provided health insurance (which is subsidized by government by not counting employer contributions as taxable income) and tax-favored retirement savings accounts.

The OECD report brims with insights about welfare systems. Did you know, for example, that China — heir to a communist social system — has a puny welfare state compared with most wealthy nations? In 2009, its social spending equaled 7 percent of GDP. Or did you realize that, despite all the talk of “austerity,” government social spending has hardly been reduced in most countries. The OECD reports cuts in a few nations (Greece, Germany and Canada, among them) but also finds that “in most countries social spending remains at historically high levels.”

The main message that Americans can take from this report is that we need a higher level of candor. The very complexity of our hybrid system seems intended to disguise the reality that we have a welfare state. We have created a new vocabulary to validate our denial. From our “safety net,” we distribute “entitlements” that are not “handouts” and don’t qualify as “welfare” payments. We pretend (or some of us do) that our Social Security taxes have been “saved” to provide for our retiree payments, when today’s Social Security checks are mainly financed by the payroll taxes of today’s workers, just as yesterday’s checks were financed by the taxes of yesterday’s workers.

If we were more honest about these matters, we might have an easier time debating what are admittedly difficult and unpopular choices. Who deserves benefits, how much and why? What are the consequences for taxpayers and the larger society? Does our hybrid mix of public and private power make sense? These are insistent issues that won’t vanish even though we pretend they don’t exist.

In the United States social spending is the second highest in the world ...
A focus on public budgets misses two important features that affect social spending totals and international comparisons of social expenditure: 1) private social expenditure and 2) the impact of tax systems.

75  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: WSJ: Riley: The Other Ferguson Tragedy on: November 26, 2014, 11:29:33 AM
Jason Riley is right.  I thought Giuliani was clumsy in making his points in the heated exchange on Meet the Press, but he introduced crucial facts that didn't go away just because distractions followed.

If you are a black who was murdered, there is a 93% chance your murderer was black, even though blacks comprise only 13% of the population.

With rounding, there is a zero percent chance your murderer was a cop, or a white cop.

Because of thugs like Brown and terrible crime statistics in certain black neighborhoods, there is a much larger need for a police presence.  That presence is there to protect black victims!  Because of those population statistics, there is something like an 87% chance (or greater) that the additional cops available for those assignments are not black.  If you are in that neighborhood and your mind is consumed with race-centric thinking, and you are black and a police officer is white, then everything that happens appears to be racial when mostly it is not.

I believe the high crime level in these neighborhoods is not racial, but cultural, and is accelerated by a half century or more of our failed social spending programs that tear apart the families in these neighborhoods, who happen to be disproportionately black.  The males are free to go through life without the responsibilities that keep the other males in our society from being criminals and street thugs.  (Proof that this is cultural, not racial, comes from the fact that blacks not in this environment don't behave like this and whites and others living in this culture do.)  The result of our policies is that many, many males go through life diverted away from the moral and financial burdens and responsibilities of getting a good education, job, credit, mortgage, home, supporting your family financially and otherwise, and keeping your criminal record clean.
76  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The war on the rule of law on: November 26, 2014, 10:44:52 AM
"Well?  Does this have merit?"


FDR is hardly the gold standard for following the constitution and Galston is paid to balance the WSJ editorial page with a  liberal, opposing view. 

Pres. Obama is not constrained by resources; his enforcement of the laws is constrained by his ideology.  You can find his reasons and motives for his actions in his own words.

Constitutional would be for the head of the executive branch to declare that he is doing he level best to uphold the current laws as written and passed until he can win enough votes in the legislative branch to get those laws changed to the way he would prefer them.  IMHO
77  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Rant: Ferguson and the Liberal false logic string I call "And Another Thing..." on: November 26, 2014, 09:51:24 AM
Ferguson offers a good opportunity to point out a very commonly used, liberal (false) logic string that I call "And another thing..."

So often the first thing a liberal says, the premise or foundation of their larger argument, is false.  Then, instead of backing up the first (false) point, they continue on with second and third points and so on, as if each additional point further demonstrates the validity of the first (false) point

Here it is out of Ferguson.  The (false) logic behind the big uproar goes something like this:  Not only did Blacks fail to get justice in this case, but did you know all these other things about racism in America?

The starting point is false - as usual.  Justice was done in this case.  A big, stupid man attacked a cop with a gun and ended up dead.  The cop used justifiable force to protect his own life.  Race had nothing to do with the attack, the struggle or the shooting.  Race had nothing to do with the legal proceedings that followed.  The Grand Jury included a mixture of races; they looked at everything and judged fairly.  If anything they bent over backwards because of the potential race implications of the result.

The starting point in the current "no Justice, no peace" arson and disruption campaign is that Brown and his family failed to get justice because he is black.  In addition to that (and another thing...), this is what always happens in America.  Life is really unfair to blacks everywhere, all the time.  The liberals and agitators making this point and organizing these protests have no qualms about the fact that their launching point for such an important campaign is abjectly false.

Even if one of the supporting points has truth in it, it is a new or separate point, not support for the original, false starting point, as presented.

Similar examples of this are found in most liberal arguments on issues, such as income inequality, minimum wage, war in Iraq, taxes on the rich, education funding, you name it.
78  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues and LE in action on: November 25, 2014, 06:37:03 PM
"Attack a police officer and bad things will happen to you."

  - Agree. Attacking an armed cop is beyond stupid in so many ways.

"Plenty of evidence that corroborates the witness statements that this was a lawful use of force."

  - I agree.  It was a very credible statement that the officer believed if he took another hit he could be knocked out or killed. 

My question, if we had the film of this and watched and studied it and were assigned to train a group of officers tomorrow how to handle the same set of circumstances next time, is there anything we would ask an officer to do differently?

79  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics - Ferguson on: November 25, 2014, 10:42:46 AM
St. Louis County Police Sgt. Brian Schellman said this morning that at least 61 people were arrested. Charges ranged from burglary to trespassing to receiving stolen property.

As of 8:30 a.m., area hospitals reported a total of 23 injuries including three admissions and two gunshot victims.

The chaos started when the first account of the incident said he was shot in the back, from a distance, for no reason.   Gradually we found out that isn't what happened. Because of the rules of the system, the officer's account of it didn't come out until now. 

I wonder how many innocent people the police in that area have been shooting that people would widely believe the first story?  How often when the innocent people are shot in the back for no reason by the police does the justice system fail to hold the officer accountable and people have to take to the streets for justice?  Relative to the ongoing level of crime against each other, the answer to those questions is pretty close to zero.

Recently I heard an ad on liberal-radio looking for protesters and donations to fight against the police state.  Maybe we will find out from the arrest who these people really are and where they are from.

Another question comes to mind, if all these people in this community are really so anti-big-government and dissatisfied with the status quo, why did they just vote 94% Democrat?   (See Ferguson State Senate district 14
80  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Law Enforcement issues and LE in action, What Darren Wilson told the Grand Jury on: November 25, 2014, 09:53:46 AM
I wonder what law enforcement people here think of the actions of the officer, as we know them, in this strange incident.

It is some kind of an ego or I dare you thing for pedestrians to intentionally compete with cars for space in a street, with sidewalks available on both sides and no doubt a law or two against blocking traffic.  For Brown, the obvious thing to do would have been to move over, at least when confronted by the police.  That isn't what happened here.  In this case, the officer spoke to them, perhaps with sarcasm.  Brown swore at him and walked on, according to this story.  Wilson called for back up and pulled out to block and confront them.

At the point where they walked on, we might all say in hindsight, the rest wasn't worth it.  But isn't that when an area becomes, what they call in other countries, a Police no-go zone?

It started with a simple request — "will you just walk on the sidewalk?" Forty-five seconds later, Michael Brown lay sprawled on the street, shot dead by a police officer who had never before fired his gun in the line of duty.

And as he drove away from the 18-year-old's body, heading to the Ferguson police station to wash Brown's blood from his hands and surrender his gun, all Officer Darren Wilson could think was, "I'm just kind of in shock of what just happened. I really didn't believe it."

Those were the words he shared with a grand jury.  And late Monday, Wilson's explanation of that deadly day in early August became public for the first time, in a small part of an enormous trove of documents released by St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch.

Thousands of pages of police interviews, autopsy reports and secret testimony — including Wilson's — were made public after McCulloch announced the grand jury's decision not to indict Wilson in Brown's death.

Until late Monday, Wilson's voice had remained silent, and the general story line went largely unchallenged: White police officer shoots unarmed young black man trying to surrender on a summer day in a St. Louis suburb.

But on Monday, Wilson's terror and panic were plain to see in 90 pages of his testimony before the grand jury on Sept. 16 and an 18-page interview with detectives that was recorded Aug. 10, the day after Brown's death.

Wilson was leaving an earlier call, having assisted the mother of a sick infant, when he saw Brown and another young man walking down the middle of the street, forcing traffic to slow and swerve around them. The police officer told the grand jury that he drove up, stopped his car and asked Wilson, "What's wrong with the sidewalk?"

In Wilson's account, it was all downhill from there. Brown swore at the officer, and the two men walked away. So Wilson called for backup, threw his police-issued Chevy Tahoe into reverse and cut the young men off.

As he opened the door, he testified, Brown slammed it shut on Wilson's leg. The officer told Brown to get back and opened the door again.

"He then grabs my door again and shuts my door," Wilson told the grand jury. "At that time is when I saw him coming into my vehicle.... I was hit right here in the side of the face with a fist."

The two men scuffled, Wilson said, and when he struggled to gain some control over the situation "and not be trapped in my car anymore," he grabbed Brown's arm. "The only way I can describe it is I felt like a 5-year-old holding on to Hulk Hogan."

Brown, he said, looked like a "demon."

I've never used my weapon before
- Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson on shooting of Michael Brown
When Wilson drew his gun from inside his car and told Brown to get back or he would shoot, the officer said, "he immediately grabs my gun and says, 'You are too much of a [coward] to shoot me.'"

Wilson said he pulled his gun because "I felt that another one of those punches in my face could knock me out or worse." Brown was bigger than the 6-foot-4 officer, and stronger, too. "I'd already taken two to the face, and I didn't think I would, the third one could be fatal if he hit me right."

Wilson ultimately got out of the car, and Brown began to run away. Then he stopped. And turned. And began to run back toward the officer. He made a fist with his left hand and reached under his shirt with his right. Wilson testified that he kept telling him to get on the ground. Brown didn't.

"I shoot a series of shots," Wilson said. "I don't know how many I shot, I just know I shot it."

Later, in front of the grand jury, Wilson was asked whether he had ever had to use excessive force in the line of duty before Aug. 9.

"I've never used my weapon before," he replied.
81  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Sen. Rand Paul - to introduce war declaration on: November 24, 2014, 10:55:51 AM
I tried to read this carefully to see if it is a spoof.

Rand Paul demands Obama go to war with ISIS
BY PAUL BEDARD | NOVEMBER 24, 2014 | 4:52 AM


Likely 2016 GOP presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul today released his draft of a “declaration of war” resolution against ISIS, expanding his foreign policy efforts.

“When Congress comes back into session in December, I will introduce a resolution to declare war against ISIS. I believe the president must come to Congress to begin a war and that Congress has a duty to act. Right now, this war is illegal until Congress acts pursuant to the Constitution and authorizes it,“ Paul said.

The release came as news leaked that President Obama was firing Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, in part for a weak effort against ISIS.


Whereas Article I, section 8, of the United States Constitution provides, ‘‘The Congress shall have the Power to . . . declare war’’;

Whereas President George Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention, lectured: ‘‘The Constitution vests the power of declaring war with Congress. Therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure.’’;

Sign Up for the Washington Secrets newsletter!
More Stories
Obama's 203rd round, 7 hours at 'one of the most exclusive golf courses in the world'
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/23/14 7:51 AM

President Obama in Las Vegas played his 203rd round of golf at one of the top course in the world.
Zogby Report Card: Score two for Obama, immigration, Keystone XL
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 1:52 PM

John Zogby: Give Obama credit for showing leadership on immigration and the Keystone XL pipeline.
Obama fundraises off immigration speech, seeks $1,000 contributions
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 12:53 PM

President Obama is using his immigration speech to seek donations up to $1,000.
Bill Gates joins bid to promote, restore House page
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 8:21 AM

New effort to promote, restore House page program features Bill Gates, a former page.
TV ad: Obama finally builds Reagan's 'shining city on a hill'
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 8:10 AM

A new TV ad says President Obama is fulfilling Ronald Reagan's pro-immigration agenda.

Rand Paul demands Obama go to war with ISIS

Whereas James Madison, father of the Constitution, elaborated in a letter to Thomas Jefferson: ‘‘The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.’’;

Whereas James Madison wrote in his Letters of Helvidius: ‘‘In this case, the constitution has decided what shall not be deemed an executive authority; though it may not have clearly decided in every case what shall be so deemed. The declaring of war is expressly made a legislative function.’’;

Whereas the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State has declared war on the United States and its allies; And

Whereas the Islamic State presents a clear and present danger to United States diplomatic facilities in the region, including our embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, and

Whereas the Islamic State presents a clear and present danger to United States diplomatic facilities in the region, including our embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, and consulate in Erbil, Iraq:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Declaration of War against the Organization known as the Islamic State’’.


(a) DECLARATION.—The state of war between the United States and the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which has been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared pursuant to Article I, section 8, clause 11, of the United States Constitution.

(b) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is hereby authorized and directed to use the Armed Forces of the United States to protect the people and facilities of the United States in Iraq and Syria against the threats posed thereto by the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

RELATED: Obama extends U.S. combat role in Afghanistan


(1) SCOPE OF AUTHORITY.—Nothing in this section shall be construed as declaring war or authorizing force against any organization—

(A) other than the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS); or

(B) based on affiliation with the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

(2) LIMITATION ON USE OF GROUND COMBAT FORCES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing the use of ground combat forces except—

(A) as necessary for the protection or rescue of members of the United States Armed Forces or United States citizens from imminent danger posed by the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS);

(B) for limited operations against high value targets; or

(C) as necessary for advisory and intelligence gathering operations.



Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1547(a)(1)), Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(b)).

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541 et seq.).

RELATED: Attention: 105 admirals, two generals warn that U.S. safety threatened by spending cuts


The authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.


The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) does not provide any authority for the use of military force against the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, and shall not be construed as providing such authority.


The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) shall terminate on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.


The declaration and authorization in this joint resolution shall expire on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.
82  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness, Hagel out, War is back on? on: November 24, 2014, 10:50:10 AM
Hagel leaving under pressure

Hagel was picked for his anti-war Republican credentials.  Also because he was considered a bit of a boob that wouldn't interfere with the White House could control the Defense Dept.  We will learn more as this unfolds.

Slow response to ISIS, Ebola.

Wasn't up to the job

How do you spell Scapegoat?

Meanwhile, in a Shift, Obama Extends U.S. Role in Afghan Combat

Surrender isn't turning out to be the best peace strategy.

The Obama learning curve (or lack thereof) has been so painful to so many people on so many fronts.
83  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Four Words That Could Kill Obamacare, King v. Burwell on: November 24, 2014, 10:30:19 AM
In a case likely to be heard in March and decided in June, the justices will dissect the meaning of four words on page 95 of the 906-page Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — four words that could render health insurance premiums unaffordable for millions of Americans.

Tax credits will be available through so-called exchanges, or online marketplaces, "established by the State."

Whether you look at meaning of the words or context, tax credits are only available through so-called exchanges, or online marketplaces, established by the State.

Now we will see if 5 Justices can read written law.
84  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / With 3 Words Obama Admits His Just-Announced Immigration Actions Are Illegal on: November 24, 2014, 10:20:09 AM
Obama answers constitutional question with a 3 word misdirection:

If you have children, you understand the rhetorical value of misdirection.

When I was a boy, two of my brothers and I were in the kitchen downstairs with Nan, when we heard a loud crash upstairs.

Nan hollered up the staircase at our other brother, “What are you doing up there?”

His answer was immediate, in just two words: “Coming down.”

And so he did.

We all agreed it was a masterful answer, in that it was both true, and it deflected any real truth-telling. We never did find out what caused the crash.

President Obama is less skilled than my little brother. After all, Obama’s deflection during last night’s immigration speech took three words — 50 percent more.

Here are those three words: “Pass a bill.”

Here’s the context…

Obama: “And to those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill. I want to work with both parties to pass a more permanent legislative solution. And the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary.
85  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hillary on Obama's Executive Order on: November 24, 2014, 10:07:45 AM
"I was hopeful that the bipartisan bill passed by the Senate in 2013 would spur the House of Representatives to act, but they refused even to advance an alternative. Their abdication of responsibility paved the way for this executive action, which follows established precedent from presidents of both parties going back many decades."
    - Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Not exactly putting a lot of distance between herself and the failed President.

Friends and supporters of Hillary say she will make and announce her decision in mid January.  If she is out, people will need to know.  If she is in, that is too early.  As a candidate people might expect her to have a view on the issues.  The one above she come to regret.  On Keystone XL pipeline?  6 years of study and still no opinion.  Can a candidate for President really not have a position on something that very simply needs just a yes or a no?

Everything she is doing now looks like she is preparing to run.  And every piece of news and feedback that comes back to her says don't do it.
86  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, Elizabeth Warren 67 in 2016, should wait her turn? on: November 24, 2014, 09:59:44 AM
" and women voters who will vote for her [Hillary Clinton] because she is a woman"

Same for Elizabeth Warren?  She is the current rock star of the left.  The energy in the Dem party, if there is any, is on the left.  Should Elizabeth Warren wait because this is Hillary's turn?   Warren will be 67 (1/2) in Nov 2016 (Hillary is 67 now).  And then 71 and 75 in the next two go-arounds.  Good luck with that.  In both parties, all potential candidates have to figure that this is their best chance.

I think it's almost certain Warren runs if Hillary doesn't.  (I fear Warren more than Hillary.)  Is Warren too good a friend to run against Hillary?

Warren said of Hillary in People magazine's gushing spotlight:   “We have talked. It’s not much more than that. Not much more,”
87  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential - Jim Webb on: November 21, 2014, 11:38:09 AM
He is not my choice, but wouldn't it be nice if Democrats offered a choice who had the best interests of the country in mind. 

Jim Webb is in - if enough people put forward enough financial support.

14 minute introductory video:
88  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 21, 2014, 11:32:35 AM
If I am not mistaken, the permits are going to be paid for by the fees charged the illegals.

IMO this self-funding thing (also see Elizabeth Warren's work on self funding the Consumer Agency) is a deeply unC'l evasion of Congress's power of the purse.

From what I have read, this is true, at least in part.  Still there are parts of it that can be de-funded, and for him to run his government outside of constitutional framework is to drive his approvals numbers down even worse.

If he is deferring deportation on only 5 million of 11 million (I don't believe those numbers), then will he be deporting the other 6 million?  Or is he lying and deceiving again?  I think we all know.

He needs to be called out on his hypocritical incrementalism.  When he says no healthcare for illegals, he means healthcare next, but not in the CBO numbers required for passage.  When he says work legally but not vote, he means, how dare you let them work but not vote!  When he says only those who have been here 5 years, he means that in 5 more years we'll have all of them, and a much bigger round to follow.  If he says any one thing and not the other, you can bet he is going for the latter.

Barack Obama makes Bernie Madoff look like an harmless, well-intentioned salesman.
89  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Cochrane: What the Inequality Warriors really want on: November 21, 2014, 11:07:21 AM
This is a great piece!  I wish more people would think the phony, inequality question all the way through.  You are not harmed by the success of others - except when the system of big government is set up to grant favorable treatment to the powerful.  Treat all people equally under the law.   Then the more your neighbor succeeds, the more likely they are hire you or your kid, or to buy your product or service, and to not be a burden on our resources and the safety net.  Jack Kemp said, the problem with the rich is that we need more of them.

"A critique of rent-seeking and political cronyism is well taken, and echoes from the left to libertarians. But if abuse of government power is the problem, increasing government power is a most unlikely solution."

(In economics, rent-seeking is spending wealth on political lobbying to increase one's share of existing wealth - without creating wealth.)

"Cronyism results when power determines wealth. Government power inevitably invites the trade of regulatory favors for political support. We limit rent-seeking by limiting the government’s ability to hand out goodies."

"Prosperity should be our goal. And the secrets of prosperity are simple and old-fashioned: property rights, rule of law, economic and political freedom. "

Note that when the inequality attackers won and took over all branches of government, inequality increased!

Illegitimate power and unequal treatment under the law, these are issues and crimes against the republic.  Inequality is a fact, not an issue. It is the existence of rungs on the economic ladder.  A perfect fight against inequality would leave everyone on the bottom rung, with no steps going up.
90  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues, Michael Ramirez on: November 21, 2014, 10:35:36 AM
91  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 21, 2014, 10:24:48 AM
"That task begins with Congress refusing to allow a dime of money to be spent executing this unlawful amnesty. This a routine, constitutional and crucial application of congressional power."

I agree with Sen. Sessions.

From National Review:
House Republicans should consider a bill to fund the government except for Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), the agency in the Department of Homeland Security responsible for implementing the president’s order, and perhaps a few other selected portions of the administration. They could then propose a bill funding these agencies, including in it a prohibition against executing the president’s amnesty. Democrats would have little excuse not to pass the former bill, and, were the president to sign it, both sides could proceed to a focused argument on immigration funding. If the president were to veto the larger bill, or Democrats to block it, a shutdown might occur — but the White House, or congressional Democrats, might end up shouldering the blame.

I have been reading and listening to the Republican side play defense on this issue the whole time Obama has floated and then delivered it.  The Republicans should stay focused on their own issues.  When the new congress convenes, pass these budget measures without fanfare and put the spotlight back on the issues on which they just ran and won, and the issues they want to win on in 2016.
92  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 20, 2014, 06:39:17 PM
Here's my suggestion for the Reps:

The underlying hold up is that the border is not protected , , , so PROTECT THE BORDER.

Pass a bill that genuinely closes the border.  Make Obama face signing or vetoing it.

This seems to me a good tip of the spear for everything else.

Proposing to add to Crafty's proposal.

1. "Pass a bill that genuinely closes the border."

2.  People also come here legally and then overstay their temporarily legal status.  Add genuine enforcement of that to the bill.

3. The 14th amendment begins:

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.

That does not mean foreigners can drop in for an anchor baby, but it needs to be clarified which can only be done through the constitutional amendment process.  Pass that separately.

4. (Updating my post, there is no need for Republicans to make any deal with those who are here until the constitutional crisis of the President's orders is resolved.)

93  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Money, the Fed, Banking, Monetary Policy, Dollar & other currencies, Gold/Silver on: November 20, 2014, 10:36:22 AM
Do crises drive prices up in the current context?  The middle east is in an accelerating burn, and oil prices are falling , , ,

Off the top of my head this looks more like a play to play for time if/when there is a run on the ruble.

Great points.  In other crisis, in Iraq, Iran, the Gulf, Libya, threat of war anywhere, it seems that all crisis drive up the price of oil.  Why not now?

In Iraq, ISIS the aggressor wants control of the oil production and revenue, not disruption.  It's quiet in Iran while they build their nuclear arsenal without objection.  America is gushing with oil from fracking and Saudi is boosting supply while global demand is likely flattening.

For Russia, their crisis is the falling price of oil.  Their current conflict is Ukraine today and maybe the Baltic States tomorrow.  Since the Russian side is both the energy producer and the attacker, I guess there is no current threat of disruption to make the oil futures market nervous.  Ukraine relies on Russian gas and oil, so they would not attack those supply lines even if they could.

Agree, he is setting aside reserves as safely as possible to protect the Ruble, or for himself somehow.   What we never know is what global trouble Putin has in mind next. 
94  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Immigration, Senate Bill, Executive Order on: November 20, 2014, 10:11:43 AM

Is there a "comprehensive" bill out there that does satisfy these concerns?

It is unfortunate that when America elected a constitutional law lecturer, they got a guy that would govern within the cracks and crevasses between the articles of the constitution instead of following its words, meaning and and intent.

Kids used to be taught in school that for a bill to become law it must first pass with majority votes in both the House and Senate, and then go to the President to be signed signed or vetoed, etc.

The president has discretion to prioritize enforcement based on limited personnel and resources, but not to unilaterally make or change laws passed by congress. 

The President is not required to take care that the laws be completely executed. That would be impossible given finite resources. The President does have power to make enforcement choices. However, he must make them faithfully.
   - Georgetown University law professor Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:
Anyone who intends to sue the president over his anticipated executive action on immigration will have to overcome "two significant hurdles." The plaintiffs will have to show that the president has abused his discretion; and the plaintiff must have standing to bring a legal challenge.
95  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Putin stockpiling gold on: November 19, 2014, 12:41:54 PM

Yes, Putin is an interesting adversary, very calculating.  With low oil costs I'm surprised he has excess currency.  I suppose he can't buy dollars or euros right before he triggers the next crisis to drive oil prices up. 
96  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 19, 2014, 12:20:59 PM
Whoever it is must have what it takes to beat the Hillary, her machine, the Pravdas, and women voters who will vote for her because she is a woman.

Bland, competent, white male with good record will NOT be enough.

Back to Carson and Rubio who I think could reach more people and break that stereotypes, but have no real executive experience?  I think you just knocked out almost every other mentioned Republican name.  I guess Chris Christie is not bland and Bobby Jindal isn't white.  As I said, there are going to be difficult trade-offs.

Your view of Hillary's status and political strength is different than mine.  

If it is Hillary, or Elizabeth Warren, and maybe even if it isn't, someone on the R ticket needs to be female.  Here we go again with the Palin type VP choice, this time Nikki Haley, Kelly Ayotte, Susana Martinez?  (I googled those 3 names and it was hard to find a 4th.  Maybe Mary Fallin, Gov of Oklahoma?

For the record, I am not conceding Scott Walker is bland.  Just passing on what is being said.  I think he will run and we will see.  

I lean toward Rubio at the start for the reasons Crafty is suggesting.  He puts excitement into the idea of freedom in a way that no one since Reagan could.  He looks white and with Cuban descent does not share common heritage with most US Hispanics, but he speaks fluent and passionate Spanish and has a chance to make our case to a lot of people.

Crafty, Who do you see that is ready, and not white, male and bland?
97  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The US Congress; Congressional races, Keystone XL Pipeline, Mary Lanrdieu on: November 19, 2014, 09:55:09 AM

The pipeline has no environmental impact and is the safest way to transport a fuel we need for transportation and her state needs economically. The House again passed it.  The Dem Senate just voted it down; got 59 votes instead of the needed 60.

 Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana) needed a win on this for her Dec 6 runoff.  Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer and the rest could care less (because she was going to lose anyway).  The Republican Senate coming in will pass it.  Goodbye Mary Landrieu.  The Republican takeover will now jump to +9.  Dem losses are -9.  Net shift in votes is 18.  And the margin is high enough for Republicans to have a good shot of retaining control in the next, much harder cycle.
98  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2016 Presidential: John Podhoretz on Scott Walker on: November 19, 2014, 09:44:31 AM
Republican primary voters want "someone who reflects their values and beliefs, who’ll stand up for conservative principles — and who has proved he can win.
Walker appears to hit this trifecta."

Scott Walker was elected three times in a state Barack Obama carried twice.

He is the preferred choice mostly of people who have read about him and not seen or heard him.

Podhoretz:  "He has kept a relatively low national profile, appearing infrequently on TV. And for those who have heard him speak, the experience is not exactly transporting: He’s colorless and unexciting to watch."

I wish Walker had Rubio's charisma or that Rubio had Walker's executive experience.  Walker is just fine in front of the camera, articulate and business-like.  Is that what people will want?  Or will they want the Greek, styrofoam towers again?  The coming primary season is going to involve difficult choices and trade-offs.

We want to win the next election, and win on and with our principles, not win an election by running away from principles.
99  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Education - Grubered on: November 19, 2014, 09:30:59 AM
From Cognitive Dissonance of the Left:

I wonder what places like MIT think that people like Gruber are doing to their brand name.  The main reaction seems to be, sorry he got caught, take down those videos and references.

I notice that MIT is closing its Economics Department, (merging it with Harvard).

These guys that advance lies to the nation in order to advance a socialistic takeover of the country, that is worth it, are called "center-left"??!!
100  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Climate Model Predicts Very Cold Winter in Northern Hemisphere on: November 19, 2014, 08:57:04 AM
A rare siting of real science and journalism below.  14.1 million square kilometers of snow coverage is a lot!  No mention of CO2.  No doubt Martha Raddatz and Candy Crowley will be all over this.  (The leftist Guardian missed this data and went ahead with the usual diatribe, snow cover gone from the Rockies by 2100:

Siberian snow cover is causing the cold air here.  What caused the increase in Siberian snow cover?  Warmth?  If so, then the earth has self correcting (negative feedback) mechanisms?  Where are those in the IPCC model??

Climate Model Predicts Very Cold Winter in Northern Hemisphere

About 14.1 million square kilometers of snow blanketed Siberia at the end of October, the second most in records going back to 1967, according to Rutgers University’s Global Snow Lab. The record was in 1976, which broke a streak of mild winters in the eastern U.S. In addition, the speed at which snow has covered the region is the fastest since at least 1998.

Taken together they signal greater chances for frigid air to spill out of the Arctic into more temperate regions of North America, Europe and Asia, said Judah Cohen, director of seasonal forecasting at Atmospheric and Environmental Research in Lexington, Massachusetts, who developed the theory linking Siberian snow with winter weather.

“A rapid advance of Eurasian snow cover during the month of October favors that the upcoming winter will be cold across the Northern Hemisphere,” Cohen said in an interview yesterday. “This past October the signal was quite robust.”...

Last year, 12.85 million square kilometers covered Eurasia at the end of October. By January, waves of frigid air were pummeling the U.S.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 124
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!