Saturday, February 16, 2019

JACK HELLNER - WHY IS TRUMP AND NOT THE OBOMB THE SO-CALLED DICTATOR???

Why is Trump, and not Obama, the so-called 'dictator'?



President Trump has been turned down by Democrats for a sensible border barrier, so he will declare a national emergency in accordance with a law Congress passed in 1976.
Somehow, following a law Congress passed gets Trump labeled as a dictator.
Here is the case for declaring a national emergency:
Tens of thousands of people die each year from drug overdoses and a huge percentage of those drugs comes across the porous southern border illegally. Here is one story, headlined: "Deadly blue 'Mexican oxy' pills take toll on US Southwest":
Aaron Francisco Chavez swallowed at least one of the sky blue pills at a Halloween party before falling asleep forever. He became yet another victim killed by a flood of illicit fentanyl smuggled from Mexico by the Sinaloa cartel into the Southwest — a profitable new business for the drug gang that has made the synthetic opioid responsible for the most fatal overdoses in the U.S.  
"It's the worst I've seen in 30 years, this toll that it's taken on families," said Doug Coleman, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration special agent in charge of Arizona. "The crack (cocaine) crisis was not as bad.  
The fentanyl that killed Chavez was among 1,000 pills sneaked across the border crossing last year in Nogales, Arizona by a woman who was paid $200 to tote them and gave two to Chavez at the party, according to court documents.
Hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, including gang members and other criminals, descend on our long southern border each year. They overwhelm our current ability to screen out and stop drugs, criminals and people with diseases.
President Trump tried to end DACA with an executive order since President Obama implemented that, with a new executive order and somehow complicit judges decided that only the first executive order was actually a law.
Trump then offered Democrats a more permanent solution on DACA in exchange for funding the border wall, stopping chain migration and ending the lottery system for immigrants and Democrats turned him down even though they have been in favor of those things in the past.
Trump has tried to get sanctuary cities and states to comply with immigration law and cooperate with ICE but he has been blocked by Democrats and complicit judges. Trump is essentially trying to enforce immigration laws Congress passed and is being thwarted at every turn.  
Democrats have declared that illegal aliens crossing the border had to be stopped in the past, but have never followed through. Now, they are absolute obstructionists.
It certainly appears that after seeking many options, President Trump's newest tack -- to give the border guards and Homeland Security what they say they need to enforce the law and protect the citizens of the United States -- is a reasonable solution to invoke for the national emergency in compliance with the 1976 law.
Trump is being transparent in what he is planning to do and where the money is coming from and yet he is being labeled a dictator.
Trump will be sued to block the national emergency and some complicit judges will go along even though he is following the law.  If Trump loses and we don’t get more protection at the border, Democrats will cheer and never Trumpers will say he didn’t keep his promise. If the American people are very unfortunate we will get a Democrat president in 2020, and we will end up with more drugs, more illegal immigration, more people dependent on government handouts and a march towards socialism. Heaven help us.
Now let’s contrast what President Trump is doing in compliance with laws that Congress wrote, and with what Obama did while he was in office when he was supported by almost all journalists and other Democrats.
President Obama repeatedly said that the Constitution didn't allow him to unilaterally change immigration laws but he did it anyway with his executive order on DACA.  Democrats not only didn't care that he went around Congress and acted as a dictator, they supported the move. 
Obama and the complicit Justice department decided that they weren’t going to enforce immigration laws and instead supported sanctuary cities and states as they defied the laws.
While the Obama administration supported cities and states that openly defied the federal law they were sworn to defend, they showed how insincere they were when they went after Arizona for wanting to enforce those same laws. Remember this headline?  "Obama administration sues Arizona over immigration law."

The Obama administration on Tuesday sued Arizona over the state’s strict new immigration law, attempting to wrestle back control over the issue but infuriating Republicans who said the border required more security.

When Obamacare came up short of funds, President Obama didn’t go to Congress or declare an emergency. He just illegally diverted the money and Democratic congressional leaders at the time, such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Sen. Chuck Schumer, and others, didn’t sue or care. Here's how the headlines went at the time, and this is a non-conservative news source: "Government Illegally Diverts Billions to Obamacare Reinsurance Slush Fund."

For 2015 Obamacare reinsurance, the administration will pay out $6 billion raised from a fee on private health insurance and an additional $1.7 billion that under federal law belongs to the Treasury department. Indeed, the decision by the Obama administration directly violates section 1341 of Obamacare which explicitly states “money shall be deposited into the general fund of the Treasury of the United States and may not be used for the [reinsurance] program.

After Obama was chastised for illegally diverting funds, that didn’t stop him. He just stole again from low-income housing. Again, Pelosi, Schumer and others didn’t care.

Remember this story?

Federal court litigation provides evidence the Obama administration illegally diverted taxpayer funds that had not been appropriated by Congress in an unconstitutional scheme to keep Obamacare from imploding.
In 2016, a U.S. District judge caught the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services Department acting unconstitutionally and therefore put an end to the illegal diversion of taxpayer funds, but the Obama administration didn’t stop there.
The Obama administration instead turned to the nation’s two government-sponsored mortgage giants – the Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as “Fannie Mae,” and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, commonly known as “Freddie Mac” – to invent a new diversion of funds in a desperate attempt to keep Obamacare from collapsing.
 “Paying out Section 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution,” Judge Collyer concluded. “Congress authorized reduced cost sharing but did not appropriate monies for it, in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget or since.”
“Congress is the only source for such an appropriation, and no public money can be spent without one.”

It is dangerous to our freedom and prosperity when most journalists, instead of holding all powerful politicians to account, support one party no matter what they say or do and seek to destroy the other party with misleading and inaccurate articles. It degrades journalism to indoctrinate the public with misleading and false stories disguised as news. Well, here we are again, they are doing it again now, and not even a true matter of national security is stopping them. 


JAMES WALSH

THE GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY’S HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA… first ease millions of illegals over our borders and into our voting booths!

 How the Democrat party surrendered America to Mexico:
                                                                                          

“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.”  Washington Times

"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!

The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.

The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”

Obama Quietly Erasing Borders (Article)



WIKILEAKS EXPOSES THE OBAMA CONSPIRACY TO FLOOD AMERICAN WITH DEM VOTING ILLEGALS

“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.”  Washington Times

Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “The Race”… now calling itself UNIDOSus.


"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!

Previous generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos, Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards, blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag

*
GLOBALIST BARACK OBAMA AND NANCY PELOSI’S CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY AND KEEP AMERICA FLOODED WITH DEM VOTING ILLEGALS

"Along with Obama, Pelosi and Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY

“One of the most disgusting things to come out of the Obama administration was "Operation Fast and Furious," where members of the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) allowed illegal gun sales to go through – commonly referred to as "gun walking" – in order to track buyers and sellers they believed were connected to the Mexican drug cartels. Nearly 2,000 firearms were sold and were eventually found throughout the United States and Mexico. Two of them were used to kill Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.”   BETH BAUMANN

**


IS BETOMATIC A CLONE OF BANKSTER-OWNED BARACK OBAMA, THE LA RAZA SUPREMACIST WHO SURRENDERED OUR BORDERS FOR 8 YEARS AS HE AND HOLDER SERVICED THEIR CRONY CRIMINAL BANKSTERS.



 “Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes.  This is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” – Karen McQuillan  AMERICAN THINKER.com

OBAMANOMICS:

Further, nearly 60% think that the next generation will be worse off than they are. And few have any faith that the economic outlook for the country will improve in the near or distant future.

There are many parallels between “Betomania” and “Obamamania,” and O’Rourke has been called the “white Obama.”


He is married to the daughter of a billionaire, so if nominated, Democrats would have a hard time attacking Republicans for supporting a billionaire president without being accused of hypocrisy. 

 He also questioned whether the Constitution was still relevant, which makes one wonder how seriously he would take the oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” should he be sworn in as president. 

WORDS OF A PSYCHOPATH

"In his 2006 autobiography The Audacity of Hope, then-Senator Obama wrote, “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”  That is why Obama won the presidency, and should O’Rourke win too, that is why he will have won" 


CRONY CAPITALISM

Barack Obama created more debt for the middle class than any president in US

history, and also had the only huge QE programs: $4.2 Trillion.

OXFAM reported that during Obama’s terms, 95% of the wealth created went to

the top 1% of the world’s wealthy. 


PATHOLOGICAL LIAR BARACK OBAMA MOCKS TRUMP
Obama orchestrated the greatest transfer of wealth to the rich in U.S. history!

THE WALL STREET BOUGHT AND OWNED DEMOCRAT PARTY
SERVING BANKSTERS, BILLIONAIRES and INVADING ILLEGALS

THE CRONY CLASS:

Income inequality grows FOUR TIMES FASTER under Obama than Bush.



“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994 Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has helped create the largest prison population in the world.”

INCOME PLUMMETS UNDER OBAMA AND HIS WALL STREET CRONIES (THERE'S A REASON WHY GEORGE S OROS RUNS OBAMA'S BID FOR A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE).





Beto's Chances



One purported top contender for the Democrats’ presidential nomination so far has stayed on the sidelines: former Representative Robert Francis O’Rourke of Texas, better known as “Beto” O’Rourke.  A rising star in the Democratic Party, even after his unsuccessful attempt to win Ted Cruz’s Senate seat last year, he has been the subject of numerous media puff pieces, and liberals are going gaga over him the same way they did over Barack Obama in 2008.
O’Rourke is a polarizing figure.  To some, he is an optimistic, clean-cut, inspirational politician at a dark and foreboding time.  To others, he is a living embodiment of the “how do you do, fellow kids?” meme; a 46-year old man trying a bit too hard to seem cool and appeal to youngsters, skateboarding onto stage and live-streaming his dental appointment on Instagram. 
Though they laugh and roll their eyes as him, Republicans should not underestimate O’Rourke.  He is a formidable campaigner, having visited all of Texas’s 254 counties during his bid for Cruz’s Senate seat.  He has a dedicated and passionate base of supporters in Texas and the rest of the country.  He raised an enormous amount of money, more than any Senate candidate in history.  He came close to winning a Senate race in a solid red state, losing to Cruz by a mere 3 points.  And that is another reason Democrats are so excited about O’Rourke: they have their eyes on Texas. 
The state is slowly turning purple, thanks to immigration and residents of California and other blue states moving there.  Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton by only 9 points in 2016, while George W. Bush defeated John Kerry by 23 points in 2004.  Texas voted for Trump by a smaller margin than did Iowa and by only a slightly larger margin than did Ohio.  Republicans can no longer take Texas for granted, and Democrats believe they can win Texas if they run the right candidate. 
Another reason he could win the nomination: Democrats are nostalgic for Obama, and O’Rourke reminds them of him.  There are many parallels between “Betomania” and “Obamamania,” and O’Rourke has been called the “white Obama.”  O’Rourke also reminds Democrats of a Kennedy, another reason for his appeal.  He even has the same first and middle names as John F. Kennedy’s younger brother, Robert F. Kennedy. 
Liberals want to forget that Trump ever existed.  They want it to be the Obama years forever, and they think if the right candidate is elected, the country can get back to business as usual and the enormous rifts that have been growing in our country will simply disappear.  O’Rourke often laments the divided state of America and talks about how he wants to unite the country.  O’Rourke and his supporters don’t realize that uniting the country is a forlorn hope.  We can’t “bridge the divide” when half the country thinks MAGA hats are equivalent to KKK hoods. 
Twenty years ago, O’Rourke might have been a shoe-in for the nomination.  But times have changed.  He is a white male in a party increasingly hostile to white males and which seeks and celebrates greater diversity in its leadership.  John Kerry may be the last white male Democrats ever nominate for president. 
Aside from hatred of white males, there is another reason Democrats prefer their nominee be nonwhite and/or a woman.  As president, any criticism of Obama from the Right was dismissed as rooted in racism, and likewise any criticism of Clinton during her presidential bid was dismissed as rooted in misogyny.  So long as Democrats run candidates not white males, they can dismiss any criticism of them as rooted in some form of bigotry. 
If O’Rourke runs for president, Democrats lose this perceived opportunity.  Even if he isn’t nominated for president, O’Rourke could be chosen as vice president to keep his supporters behind the ticket.  In keeping with tradition, O’Rourke is an Irish Catholic -- for some reason, all recent vice-presidential nominees have been Irish Catholics: Joe Biden, Paul Ryan, Tim Kaine and Mike Pence (although Pence converted to Evangelical Christianity). 
Discounting his race and gender, O’Rourke still faces obstacles to getting the Democratic nomination.  He is very much an establishment Democrat in an increasingly progressive party, although he has publicly taken progressive positions, such as defending the NFL protesters and advocating for the impeachment of Trump.  He is married to the daughter of a billionaire, so if nominated, Democrats would have a hard time attacking Republicans for supporting a billionaire president without being accused of hypocrisy. 
Perhaps most importantly, O’Rourke has twice been arrested.  In 1995, he was arrested for attempted burglary for breaking into the University of Texas at El Paso, but the charges were dropped.  Three years later, he was arrested fordriving while intoxicated, after crashing into a truck and attempting to flee the scene.  In an op-ed, O’Rourke acknowledged the incident, calling it a “serious mistake for which there is no excuse.”  However, during a debate with Cruz, hefalsely claimed, “I did not try to leave the scene of the accident.” 
But a controversial past doesn’t always rub off on a candidate.  Obama associated with a communist professor who planted bombs and a pastor who said, “God damn America,” and it didn’t seem to hurt his candidacy.  The Gore campaign revealed close to election day in 2000 that Bush had a DUI, yet he still won.  And up until his death in 2009, Democrats still admired the “Lion of the Senate” Ted Kennedy, despite the Chappaquiddick incident. 
O’Rourke has many weaknesses, and his popularity may be less than we are led to believe.  Last Monday, Trump and O’Rourke held dueling rallies in El Paso. 
Video screen grab via RCP
Trump’s rally was attended by more people than O’Rourke’s rally, despite El Paso being his home town.  If O’Rourke can’t get more people to attend his rally than the president’s in the city where he was born and lived his whole life, is he really much of a threat to Trump?  Perhaps he’ll run for John Cornyn’s Senate seat instead and lose that race as well. 
There is also the question of his preparedness for the office of President of the United States.  In January, O’Rourke gave a lengthy interview to the Washington Post.  Aside from being totally opposed to a border wall, he had little to say on the issues aside from “I don’t know” and “I don’t necessarily understand.”  He also questioned whether the Constitution was still relevant, which makes one wonder how seriously he would take the oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” should he be sworn in as president. 
Last month, a website called draftbeto.org, which wants to do just that, released a short video in support of a Beto candidacy.
Much like O’Rourke himself, the video is full of meaningless platitudes and contains no concrete policy proposals. 
But what if that’s what the American people want?  What if voters don’t want someone with concrete policy proposals, but someone who makes them feel all warm and fuzzy inside?  Did Obama win because of the issues, or because he promised Americans “hope and change?”  Did Trump win because of the issues, or because he promised to “make America great again?”  Elections have been decided by whichever side can best sell their candidate since at least the “Tippecanoe and Tyler too” campaign in 1840. 
O’Rourke is an empty suit that parrots liberal talking points, and supporters project their views onto him.  He is popular because of this, not in spite of it.  In his 2006 autobiography The Audacity of Hope, then-Senator Obama wrote, “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”  That is why Obama won the presidency, and should O’Rourke win too, that is why he will have won. 
Thomas OMalley can be contacted at thomasomalley861@yahoo.com


MICHELLE OBAMA ANNOUNCES SHE WILL RUN FOR THE WHITE HOUSE AND BE BARACK’S THIRD TERM FOR LIFE.
MEXICO WILL ELECT HER!
https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/01/michelle-obama-ill-be-baracks-third.html
The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.

“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years.   MATTHEW VADUM
 Editorial Reviews: Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics. TIMOTHY P CARNEY


BARACK Hussein OBAMA: THE CLOSET MUSLIM PSYCHOPATH WHO HATED AMERICA!
"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these."

The mullahs rolled in cash as a result of rolling Obama and his gullible team over the deal, knowing that Obama was desperate for some sort of legacy.  MONICA SHOWALTER

MUSLIM DICTATORS, INCLUDING THE 9-11 INVADING SAUDIS, FUNDED THE PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES OF BUSH, CLINTON and OBAMA!


ISLAMIST BARACK OBAMA


“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM

"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these." MONICA SHOWALTER

"Along with Obama, Pelosi and Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY

GLOBALIST BARACK OBAMA AND NANCY PELOSI’S CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY AND KEEP AMERICA FLOODED WITH DEM VOTING ILLEGALS

"Along with Obama, Pelosi and Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY

 

One of the most disgusting things to come out of the Obama administration was "Operation Fast and Furious," where members of the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) allowed illegal gun sales to go through – commonly referred to as "gun walking" – in order to track buyers and sellers they believed were connected to the Mexican drug cartels. Nearly 2,000 firearms were sold and were eventually found throughout the United States and Mexico. Two of them were used to k ill Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. BETH BAUMANN

THE CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY

The Democrat Party’s secret agenda for wider open borders, more welfare for invading illegals, more jobs and free anything they illegally vote for…. All to destroy the two-party system and build the GLOBALISTS’ DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER OPEN BORDERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED.

https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/frontpage-hidden-agenda-of-pueblo-sin.html

Demonstrably and irrefutably the Democrat Party became the party whose principle objective is to thoroughly transform the nature of the American electorate by means of open borders and the mass, unchecked importation of illiterate third world peasants who will vote in overwhelming numbers for Democrats and their La Raza welfare state. FRONTPAGE MAG

February 16, 2016

The United States at the Point of No Return

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_united_states_at_the_point_of_no_return.html#.VsOT8DBA5Nc.blogger

 

There is an unquestioned disconnect between the vast majority of the American people and the so-called elites or ruling class.  Whenever I am in the company of those that are members of this exclusive fraternity, and when the conversation inevitably turns to the subject of the irascible mood of the electorate, I offer what I consider to be a valid theory as to one of the primary reasons why.  That is: a plurality of the populace, myself included, firmly believe the United States is approaching the point of no return to its founding as a nation of individual freedom and opportunity, and that the 2016 election is the most significant in 150 years insofar as determining the long term fate of the country.
More often than not these acquaintances react as if Chicken Little had just escaped the asylum and was running amok claiming the sky is falling.   However, in an effort to be kind to the loon in their midst, I have been told, as a figurative pat on the head, because of my personal background as displaced war orphan from World War II that I am hypersensitive and what is going on in America really isn’t as bad as I claim.
Not as bad as I claim? 
Not since the presidential election of 1932 has the American electorate been so mired in discontent.  Despite the best efforts of the media to portray this discontentment as limited to the Republican base, a variety of polls have confirmed a vast majority of the populace shares this same sense of disgruntlement.  Innumerable polls taken over the past seven years are consistent in showing nearly 7 in 10 Americans believing the nation is headed in the wrong direction. 
Further, nearly 60% think that the next generation will be worse off than they are. And few have any faith that the economic outlook for the country will improve in the near or distant future.
Beginning in the late 1980’s, the cognoscenti declared that expansive government spending, globalization and free trade, combined with a comprehensive and overarching regulatory regime determined to root out so-called corruption and inequality as well as save the planet from the over blown evils of global warming, would be the course the nation should pursue.  The result of this foolhardy and myopic scheme:
1.   In 1988 the national debt of the United States stood at $2.6 Trillion, today it is over $19.0 Trillion-- an increase of 635% (and projected to reach $29.0 Trillion by 2026).  On the other hand the debt of all the nations on earth has grown by only 135% since 1988.
2.   Since November of 2008 the working age population has increased by over 18 million. However, the number of those employed has increased just 5.5 million.  Meanwhile those unemployed or no longer in the work force has ballooned by 12.4 million to a staggering total of 102 million or 40.4% of the working age population.
3.   Another factor impacting on the economic health of the American people is immigration.  In 1988 there were 16 million immigrants (including less than a million illegal aliens) living in the United States.  Today that number has skyrocketed to 42.4 million (including an estimated 12 million illegal aliens).  This enormous increase (165%) in the immigrant population has not only put pressure on a stagnant job market but it has also been a major factor in the decline of median income in the country.
4.   The upshot of all the above is that since 1988 the income of the top 5% has risen 39.3% (adjusted for inflation) and the income of the bottom 50% has fallen by 1.9%.
5.   Since 2008 the Obama cabal has added over 18,000 pages to the Code of Federal Regulations. It is estimated that complying with federal regulations costs the economy nearly $2 Trillion per year and is, along with taxes and innumerable mandates, one of the principle reasons for the lack of new business start-ups and loss of jobs to other countries.
One of the primary hallmarks of the United States had been that of a classless society wherein economic factors allowed the citizenry to take advantage of the marketplace in order to move up or down based on their efforts and willingness to work.  However, this scenario is disappearing as the opportunities for upward mobility cease to exist.  In its place a class driven society, similar to all other quasi-socialist nations past and present, is now becoming inevitable as even the Bureau of Labor Statistics admits that the level of Americans working and in the labor force will continue to decrease over the next 8 years.
Another of the primary factors in the decline of the United States is that the nation’s elites, rather than view education as the means for the people to attain success in a competitive world, have recast it into a vehicle for their pet theories and political views.  Whether it is the promulgation of faux self-esteem, the obsession with the so-called evils of capitalism and the nation’s past, and the theoretical joys of socialism among other inane curricula, the education establishment has assured that the American people are rapidly becoming among the least well-educated populations in the world.
In 2013 American 15 year olds ranked 32nd among industrialized countries in math, 20th in reading and 24th in science.  In 1988 this same age group ranked among the top 5-10 nations in the world in these same categories. Further, recent polls have indicated that as a byproduct of the radicalized education establishment, nearly 7 out of 10 between the ages of 18 and 29 would vote for an avowed socialist. Thus it is clear that the future of the country is on very shaky ground.
As for the issue of freedom: in a recent analysis it was determined that the United States now ranks 12th among the nations of the world in economic freedom (6thin 2008) but a dismal 31st in personal freedom (17th in 2008).  The authors of the study commented:
The decline reflects the long-term drop in every category of economic freedom and its rule of law indicators. The US performance is worrisome and shows that the US can no longer claim to be the leading bastion of liberty in the world.  In addition to the expansion of the regulatory state and drop in economic freedom, the war on terror, the war on drugs and the erosion of property rights due to a greater use of eminent domain all likely contributed to the US decline.
Using the cudgel of the mainstream media, the entertainment complex and the education establishment, the Left and its surrogate, the Democratic Party, have successfully inculcated into a plurality of the American people a belief that there are no moral absolutes and that the state can grant any rights that it so chooses to whomever it chooses.  Further, the nation’s founding documents are arcane, racially insensitive, and unsuitable for today.  Thus religious liberty, property rights and freedom of speech are under aggressive assault.  The Judiciary is now almost under the complete control of these same statists, and with the death of Justice Scalia the last line of defense, the Supreme Court, is in peril.
The vast majority of the American people sense that the future of the nation and that of their progeny is in serious jeopardy.  However, one of the most troubling aspects of the current unease and angst among the general public is what this portends: when anger and frustration evolve into deep seated passion, reason is too often a casualty.  As Thomas Sowell recently wrote:
Too many nations, in desperate times, especially after the authorities have discredited themselves and forfeited the trust of the people, have turned to some new and charismatic leader, who ended up turning a dire situation into an utter catastrophe,
This has been true throughout history whether in England in the 1650’s, France in the 1790’s, or Russia, Italy and Germany in the 20th century. 
In the current campaign for the next president, there are candidates attempting to tap into the ire of the citizenry by either promising that a purer form of socialism will magically solve the problems or by claiming that they, by sheer force of their will and personality, will part the seas and save the nation.  Unfortunately, due to the ill-education of the populace as well as their angst, far too many seeds of this demagoguery are falling on fertile ground.  The election of any of these candidates will only exacerbate and make permanent the nations woes.
So to my ruling class friends safely ensconced in Washington, New York and other enclaves among the like-minded and wealthy, this nation is at the point of no return to the country of freedom and opportunity that allowed you to be where you are.  The folks in fly-over country know it and so should you.

*
 more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_united_states_at_the_point_of_no_return.html#ixzz40Mw7Fxf8
Follow us: 
@AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
An old joke I heard during my brief time in the opera business went something like this: There are four types of tenors: leggiero, lyric, spinto, and heldentenor. The leggiero tenor has no balls. The lyric tenor has one ball. The spinto tenor has two...
The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.
Inequality, class and life expectancy in America

Inequality, class and life expectancy in America

15 February 2016
A study by Brookings Institution economists released Friday documents a sharp increase in life span divergences between the rich and the poor in America. The report, based on an analysis of Census Bureau and Social Security Administration data, concludes that for men born in 1950, the gap in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of wage earners and the bottom 10 percent is more than double the gap for their counterparts born in 1920.

For those born in 1920, there was a six-year differential between rich and poor. For those born in 1950, that difference had reached 14 years. For women, the gap grew from 4.7 years to 13 years, almost tripling.

Overall, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 over those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, it soared by about 28 percent.

Life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of male wage earners born in 1950 rose by less than one year compared to that for male workers born 40 years earlier—to 73.6 from 72.9. But for the top 10 percent, life expectancy leapt to 87.2 from 79.1.

The United States ranks among the worst so-called rich countries when it comes to life expectancy. But its low ranking is entirely due to the poor health and high mortality of low-income Americans. According to the Social Security Administration, life expectancy for the wealthiest US men at age 60 was just below the rates for Iceland and Japan, two countries with the highest levels. Americans in the bottom quarter of the wage scale, on the other hand, ranked just above Poland and the Czech Republic.

Life-expectancy is the most basic indicator of social well-being. The minimal increase for low-income workers and the widening disparity between the poor and the rich is a stark commentary on the immense growth of social inequality and class polarization in the United States. It underscores the fact that socioeconomic class is the fundamental category of social life under capitalism—one that conditions every aspect of life, including its length.

The Brookings Institution findings shed further light on the catastrophic decline in the social position of the American working class. They follow recent reports showing a sharp rise in death rates for both young and middle-aged white workers, primarily due to drug abuse, alcoholism and suicide. Other recent reports have shown a dramatic decline in life expectancy for poorer middle-aged Americans and a reversal of decades of declining infant mortality.

It is no mystery what is behind this vast social retrogression. It is the product of the decay of American capitalism and a four-decade-long offensive by the ruling elite against the working class. From Reagan to the Obama administration, Democrats and Republicans alike have overseen a corporate-government assault on the jobs, wages, pensions and health benefits of working people.
The ruling elite has dismantled the bulk of the country’s industrial infrastructure, destroying decent-paying jobs by the millions, and turned to the most parasitic and criminal forms of financial speculation as the main source of its profit and private wealth. Untold trillions have been squandered to finance perpetual war and the maniacal self-enrichment of the top 1 percent and 0.1 percent.
The basic infrastructure of the country has been starved of funds and left to rot, to the point where uncounted millions of people are being poisoned with lead and other toxins from corroded water systems. Flint, Michigan is just the tip of the iceberg.

Under Obama, this social counterrevolution has been intensified. The financial meltdown of 2008 has been utilized by the same forces that precipitated the crash to carry through a reordering of social relations aimed at reversing every social gain won by the working class in the course of a century of struggle. A central target of the attack is health care for working people.

Obamacare is the spearhead of a worked-out strategy to reduce the quantity and quality of health care available to workers and reorganize the health care system directly on a class basis. Corporate and government costs are to be slashed by gutting employer-paid health care, forcing workers individually to buy expensive, bare-bones plans from the insurance monopolies, and rationing drugs, tests and medical procedures to make them inaccessible to workers.

The rise in mortality for workers and the widening of the life span gap between rich and poor are not simply the outcome of impersonal economic forces. In corporate boardrooms, think tanks and state agencies, the ruling class is working to lower working class life expectancy. In late 2013, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank with the closest ties to the Pentagon and the CIA, published two 
policy papers decrying the “waste” of money on health care for the elderly. The clear message was that ordinary people were living much too long and diverting resources needed by the military to wage war around the world.

The social and economic chasm in America finds a political expression in the vast disconnect between the entire political establishment and the masses of working people. Neither party nor any of their presidential candidates, the self-described “socialist” Bernie Sanders included, can seriously address the real state of social conditions or offer a serious program to address the crisis.

In his final State of the Union Address last month, Obama presented an absurd picture of a resurgent economy. “The United States of America, right now,” he declared, “has the strongest, most durable economy in the world… Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction.”
In the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton and Sanders are seeking to outdo one another in seizing the mantle of the Obama administration and praising its supposed social and economic achievements.

They cannot address the real conditions facing the masses of working people because they defend the capitalist system, which is the source of the social disaster. The remedy must be based on an understanding of the disease. It is the building of an independent socialist and revolutionary movement uniting the entire working class, in the US and around the world.

Barry Grey



February 13, 2016 

More 'legacy lies' from outgoing Obama on economy

Here is what President Obama said on the Ellen show on Abe Lincoln's birthday:
Since I came into office, we reduced the deficit by two-thirds, but if you ask the average person, they're sure that spending has shot up. And the reason is because there are a bunch of folks who say that we're wildly overspending, even though we aren't.
Here are some actual numbers: in FY 2007, the last year President Bush and Republicans had 100% control of Congress, federal spending including both wars was $2.7 trillion.  The budget President Obama just submitted is $4.1 trillion.  That is up over 50% despite record-low interest rates and his continually bragging that he has ended the wars.  Median family income around the country is actually down or flat, so I do not understand how the president could pretend that they aren't overspending and taxing.
The deficit was down to $161 billion in FY 2007, including the spending on the wars and because of President Bush's across-the-board tax cuts in the summer of 2003.  In FY 2003, federal income tax receipts had decreased to around $900 billion prior to the tax cuts, due to a recession and a collapsed stock market.  By FY 2007, due to the stimulus of the tax cuts, the economy rebounded, economic growth was substantial, unemployment was way down (not because of a lower labor participation rate), and income tax receipts had climbed to over $1.5 trillion.  The tax rate cuts did not cause receipts to go down, as Democrats and CBO had projected; they actually skyrocketed by over 60%.  The tax cuts obviously did not cause the deficit.
The projected deficit for FY 2016 is projected to be over $500 billion.  Think how high it would be if the Federal Reserve weren't keeping the interest rates artificially low.
Despite the record-low interest rates and massive increases in federal spending, economic growth has been some of the slowest on record after a recession.  Keynesian economics is obviously not that stimulating.
The president also continually says that his policies brought us out of the great recession.  The recession actually ended by June 2009, four months and ten days after he took office.  This is obviously before any of his policies could have had any effect.
On February 10, in Springfield, Illinois, he gave a speech where he said his opponents are not entitled to their own facts.  It would be nice if he paid attention to that lecture, and it would be great if the media would call him out on his many false statements.
  
February 2, 2016

The ‘Right Stuff’ for the Presidency

By Jon N. Hall 
An old joke I heard during my brief time in the opera business went something like this: There are four types of tenors: leggiero, lyric, spinto, and heldentenor. The leggiero tenor has no balls. The lyric tenor has one ball. The spinto tenor has two balls. And the heldentenor has two balls, and he’s standing on one of them.
The joke might be funny only to opera goers, especially those who attend the Bayreuth Festival. But allow me to add that the recently-departed Canadian heldentenor Jon Vickers had three or four balls and never needed to stand on any of them. (As you might guess, I’m a fan of that late, great singer.)
In any event, balls bring us to Margaret Thatcher, former prime minister of the U.K. Some might think it rude to say that the “Iron Lady” had more balls than the men of her day leading other European nations -- rude, that is, to Lady Thatcher, who was every inch a woman. However, it could be said that compared to some of her male counterparts, Mrs. Thatcher certainly had no fewer balls.
What is meant by “balls” is: guts, grit, courage, will, determination, and resolve. But those attributes can also work in the service of evil; Hitler certainly had “will,” didn’t he? So there must be other qualities that are needed in the leader of a nation besides balls. Just what are those other qualities that make a person fit to be the prime minister or the president of a great nation?
At a recent rally in New Hampshire, former president Clinton spoke of his wife Hillary: “I spent a lot of time thinking about this. I do not believe in my lifetime anybody has run for this job at a moment of great importance who was better qualified by knowledge, experience, and temperament to do what needs to be done now to restore prosperity, to deal with these human issues, to make us as safe as possible. Thank you very much [short video].”
Okay, but why believe him? After all, the former president has a record of lying, even under oath in a grand jury. Perhaps Bill’s just trying to get himself back in the White House. And I’d like to remind the former president that he was alive in 1946. So his “lifetime” includes the runs for president of Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, and Reagan. Hillary’s more qualified than those guys? C’mon, Bill.
Going the Distance,” a January 2014 article in The New Yorker, is often cited for Pres. Obama’s reference to ISIS as a junior varsity basketball team: “The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.” (And getting elected president doesn’t mean one is fit to be president, Mr. President.)
Another Obama quote from that same article is germane to our issue of what are the essentials, the “right stuff,” for being president: “I have strengths and I have weaknesses, like every president, like every person. I do think one of my strengths is temperament.”
Is that a fact? Does Obama have the correct temperament for the presidency? When Bill Clinton spoke in New Hampshire about his wife, he stressed the word “temperament.” So, what exactly is theideal presidential temperament?
One important aspect of temperament is the ability and willingness to be collegial. “Collegiality” involves respecting one’s colleagues and listening to their ideas; it involves being open to others’ input. So many of the monumental achievements of the modern age, like going to the Moon, were massive collegial efforts, where folks pool their knowledge and expertise. Together, we’re smarter.
Barack Obama demonstrated a lack of collegiality at the Healthcare Summit in 2010. Senator McCain had just presented a very respectful call to revisit certain issues in the healthcare legislation that would become ObamaCare, and finished his comments saying, “I thank you, Mr. President.” Obama responded thus: “Let me just make this point, John, because we’re not campaigning anymore; the election’s over.” Some might have wished that McCain had responded in kind: Yes, Barry, I know, and I can’t explain the electorate’s bad judgment.
Fortunately, Sen. McCain was a gentleman and refrained from payback. Had he done so, it would have further poisoned the summit, (and he would have lowered himself to Obama’s level). There was nothing in Sen. McCain’s comments that was unreasonable, but the president couldn’t resist putting McCain in his place. What would possess someone to be so rude to a genuine American patriot? Was it that Sen. McCain wouldn’t let Obama cut him off: “Can I just finish, please?” Maybe that ticked off our little princeling. (You can watch McCain’s entire presentation by starting at the 2:21:10 mark of this C-SPAN video, or you can watch just the end, or this split-screen version positioned at Obama’s snark.)
Throughout his presidency, Obama has demonstrated a singular deficiency at collegiality. When Obama encounters questions he doesn’t like, he tries to shut down the questioner and end the discussion. When asked if the healthcare bill’s “individual mandate” were actually a tax, Obama would have none of it, and laughed at his questioner dismissively. Obama’s belief in his own pet ideas is so absolute that he is even comfortable overriding the best advice of his generals. Obama seems not to have an ability to work with others; it’s all “my way or the highway.” But there’s no need for collegiality if you already know everything. In “The Confident Ignorance of Barack Obama,” Thomas Sowell writes:
As Professor Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago Law School has pointed out, Obama made no effort to take part in the marketplace of ideas with other faculty members when he was teaching a law course there. What would be the point, if he already knew the truth and knew that they were wrong? [Italics added.]
The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.
America is so beaten up and broken right now that she needs a “savior,” like a Lincoln. If Obama doesn’t do the right thing and proceed with an indictment of Mrs. Clinton, then Republicans should “fight fire with oil” and nominate a woman. And they should also insist on a minority for running mate. Just to be sure, they probably ought to do those two things anyway. Carly Fiorina might just have the right temperament to be president, but there are other terrific conservative women that convention delegates could draft.
America needs a collegial president, not a “lyrical” one.

Read more: 
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/01/the_right_stuff_for_the_presidency.html#ixzz3z2cbt8Me
Follow us: 
@AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Another Surge of Illegal Immigrants Along the Southwest Border: Is this the Obama Administration’s New Normal?

House Committee on the Judiciary
9:00 a.m., Thursday, February 4, 2016
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/hearings?ID=9AC016C4-D7CD-44D7-8172-9B81E587D2BD

Witnesses:

Brandon Judd, U.S. Border Patrol Agent and the President of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) National Border Patrol Council

Steven McCraw, Director, Texas Department of Public Safety

Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies, Center for immigration Studies
 RASMUSSEN:

Republican Debate Shows Where Comprehensive Immigration Is Headed: Nowhere


House Appropriations Boss Initiates Crackdown on Sanctuaries

By Jessica VaughanFebruary 1, 2016

Today the chairman of the House appropriations subcommittee in charge of funding the Department of Justice, John Culberson (R-Texas), put the Obama administration on notice that it must take steps to rein in sanctuary jurisdictions or risk problems getting approval for its own budget requests. In addition, Culberson announced that he will begin requiring local jurisdictions to follow federal law and stop obstructing communication with immigration agencies as a condition for receiving certain federal law enforcement funding.BLOG: LIKE ALL OF OBAMA'S CABINET, ONE MUST FIRST BE CONNECTED TO THE BANKSTER SECTOR AND SECONDLY BE AN ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS, SABOTAGE E-VERIFY AND PROMOTE THE INTERESTS OF LA RAZA ABOVE LEGALS. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT LORETTA LYNCH HAS AND WILL DO.


In a 
sternly worded letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Culberson said that he has a responsibility to ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies are following federal law before they can get federal grants. He said that sanctuary policies restricting communication between local and federal officials are a clear violation of Section 1373 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Among the jurisdictions that have imposed such policies are San Francisco, Cook County, Ill., and New York City. In addition to prohibiting local officers from communicating with immigration authorities, these jurisdictions bar federal officers from coming into jails to interview or arrest deportable criminals.

State and local sanctuary policies obstruct immigration enforcement and cause the release of criminal aliens back to the streets of American communities. According to ICE records that the Center obtained in a FOIA request, in 2014 more than 9,000 criminal aliens that ICE was seeking to deport were instead released. More than 2,300 of these criminal aliens went on to commit additional crimes within just a few months.

The three law enforcement funding programs that could become off-limits to sanctuaries currently dispense more than $1 billion a year to state and local agencies.
Mr. Culberson contacted the Center shortly after the publication of 
this information in July, saying that he had long sought concrete information on the extent of this problem and that he was determined to use his authority to address it. The Center has compiled a list of over 300 cities, counties, and states that have laws, ordinances, regulations, resolutions, policies, or other practices that protect criminal aliens from deportation — either by refusing to or prohibiting agencies from complying with ICE detainers, imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance, or otherwise impeding open communication and information exchanges between their employees or officers and federal immigration officers. These jurisdictions are noted on a map here.
Culberson's letter outlines several steps he expects the Justice Department to take: 
1.             Beginning this year, amend the grant application forms for the Byrne/Justice Assistance Grants (JAG), Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants, and State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) reimbursement program to require agencies seeking these funds to swear that they do not have policies that violate Section 1373; and
2.             Work with sanctuary jurisdictions to change their policies, and if they do not, take legal action to compel their compliance with federal law;
3.             Deny funding to any non-compliant sanctuary jurisdictions.
In addition, he asks the attorney general to look at whether jurisdictions that release criminal aliens sought by ICE are in violation of 8 USC 1324, the federal felony statute that prohibits anyone from shielding illegal aliens from detection. After all, these jurisdictions have been notified in writing by the detainers (federal Form I-247) that the aliens' identities and status have been confirmed by biometric fingerprint matching, and that federal agents wish to take custody of the aliens, and/or to be notified of the date, time, and place of release — so the sanctuaries are knowingly releasing deportable aliens sought by ICE. He said that he will consider applying this section of the law next year to block funding to jurisdictions that release criminal aliens sought by ICE. This action could affect the hundreds of agencies that fail to comply with or accept ICE detainers, for example.

Culberson warned that if the administration stubbornly continues to tolerate sanctuaries, he will find it hard to look favorably on any spending requests from DOJ in the coming appropriations season: "I hope the attorney general will do the right thing here so that I am not compelled to object to relevant portions of the Department's spending plan and reprogramming requests. Any refusal by the Department to comply with these reasonable and timely requests will factor heavily in my consideration of their 2017 budget requests."

Even following public outcry over a series of cases of murders committed by criminal aliens after release by sanctuaries, including the killing of Kate Steinle in San Francisco, the Obama administration has resisted calls for action to discourage or punish the jurisdictions that obstruct immigration enforcement. Instead, it has pressed ahead in implementing the so-called Priority Enforcement Program, which explicitly allows sanctuary policies that violate federal law. It's clear that the administration is more interested in protecting criminal aliens than in protecting the public from their acts; now we'll see if the Department of Justice is willing to jeopardize its own funding to spare sanctuaries from being sanctioned, and if the sanctuaries are willing to sacrifice federal funding in order to protect criminal aliens.




Surge in Illegal Aliens, 500% Increase in Some U.S. Ports of Entry

 

Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicles, December 30, 2015
The agency’s own statistics certainly contradict that, showing that the southern border region is as porous and vulnerable as ever. Other entry ports that saw large hikes in Central American illegal immigrants during the first two months of this fiscal year include Del Rio, Texas (269%), El Centro, California (216%) and Rio Grande Valley, Texas (154%). The Border Patrol breaks the stats down by “family unit” and illegal immigrants under the age of 18, referred to as “Unaccompanied Alien Children” or UAC. The Rio Grande Valley port of entry topped the list in both categories with 8,537 family units and 6,465 UACs during the two-month period. In all, the nation’s nine southern border crossings saw an average of 173% increase in family units and a 106% increase in minors during the short period considered.

Some of the illegal immigrants are Mexican nationals, but the overwhelming majority comes from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The government records show that somehow 4,450 family units from El Salvador evaded our topnotch border security and entered the United States in a period of only two months. Guatemala and Honduras had 3,934 and 3,203 respectively. Mexico had 538 family units. Of interesting note is that, during this period, the Border Patrol reports 35,234 apprehensions in the region of foreigners labeled by the government as “Other Than Mexican” or OTM. This is a term used by federal authorities to refer to nationals of countries that represent a terrorist threat to the U.S.
. . .http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/12/surge-in-illegal-aliens-500-increase-in-some-u-s-ports-of-entry/

No comments: