Help fight the
liberal media

click title for home page
  
Be a subscriber

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
The stuff you won't see in the liberal media (click "Replies" for top stories)
Calendar Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 6      1   2   3   4   Next   »
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #1 

Obama to bypass Congress on Paris agreement

pic345.jpg 

Michael Bastach (DailyCaller) is reporting that Team Obama is quietly forging ahead with plans to offer up an international commitment to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to fight global warming -- without congressional approval.

Reuters reports that the U.S. submitted its vision for a new international global warming agreement to the United Nations on Wednesday, suggesting a "bifurcated approach" of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol -- placing different emissions targets for rich and poor countries.

"So this is just the latest example of President Obama's contempt for obeying the Constitution and our laws," Myron Ebell, director of the Center of Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. "In the past, rulers who act as if the law does not apply to them were called tyrants."

U.N. diplomats are set to meet in Paris next year to hash out a new international climate agreement, though talks last year were stalled by disagreements over how much rich countries would have to pay poor countries to offset carbon emissions and forgo some development.

"There have been, and will continue to be, dramatic and dynamic shifts in countries' emissions and economic profiles that make such an approach untenable, environmentally and otherwise," the United States plan said.

Annie Petsonk, international counsel to the Environmental Defense Fund, noted that the U.S. plan was legally different than the Kyoto Protocol -- it doesn't require congressional approval.

The U.S. Constitution says that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate" to make treaties with other countries. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol had to be ratified by Congress -- and it never was, even though the Clinton administration signed onto it.

But Obama's plan would rely on individual countries to enforce their own emissions reductions. And since Obama has already implemented his own "climate action plan," the U.S. would not need congressional approval to implement it, since it's already being done through executive orders. Petsonik said Obama's U.N. plan was simply an "international counterpart" to his plan to cut U.S. carbon emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 -- and not a treaty.

If countries agree to the plan, they would be required to lower their carbon emissions after 2020 and rich countries, like the U.S. and Japan, would be held to the same reduction commitments as poor, developing countries like China and India.

"The only way we're going to do that is if countries like the United States and France can over time come to a common position, and bring in countries like China and India as well," a senior administration official told Reuters.

The real question is, can countries like China and India, which are rapidly developing, curb their use of carbon-intensive fossil fuels?

"The U.S. is staking out fairly firm stuff that they want to see," Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Reuters. "All the major countries, including China, India and Brazil, are expected to be fairly transparent and detailed. That is the clear reading from this."

Conservatives and climate skeptics don't agree.

"CEI has warned for several years that the Obama Administration would follow advice from environmental pressure groups and try to sign a new U.N. agreement that ignores the Senate's constitutional role," Ebell said.

"It is also worth noting that any agreement Obama negotiates will not take effect until after he leaves office, so that a future President and Congress will be stuck with the damage it does to the economy," Ebell added. "But without Senate ratification, it should be fairly easy for a future president and Congress to dismantle."


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #2 

A most unusual tweet?

Tweet105.jpg 

I almost passed this by, but check out the logo. That's Barack Obama's organizing group.

Evidently, some of Obama's supporters are already plotting for a third Obama term.



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #3 

How to create a banana republic

Image72.jpg

Daniel Greenfield says you get a banana republic by starting with a dictator. 

Obama's position has been straightforward, at least privately. He will do whatever he wants and no one will stop him. He has repeatedly defied Congress and the courts to do so.

While he plays the game of giving speech in which he demands that Congress do X or Y, it's in practice shut out of the process. Here's how it worked on the Iran Deal.

Obama made it clear to Democrats in Congress that he would implement the deal no matter what. The Republican leadership by now has gotten the message. The message is that Congressional voters are irrelevant. They don't affect policy unless the dictator-in-chief allows them to.

That reduces all such votes to positioning. Gestures. Some are more meaningful than others, but barring impeachment proceedings, they don't really matter.

Obama illegally allocates money, goes to war, makes treaties and makes appointments while bypassing the Senate. In such an environment, you either defy or you appear to defy. Compromise is irrelevant because Obama doesn't compromise. Not even with fellow Democrats.

So the Republican leadership has settled down to an appearance of defying Obama. This appearance triggers Obama's rage just as badly as the real thing would because he is a petty little dictator. And besides, conflict community organizing is about the only thing he's actually qualified to do. So he racks up victories in which he does whatever he wants and the media cheers him on.

Republicans play the opposition, but they're not genuinely opposing anything because there are no more checks and balances. Congress has been rendered inert. The Supreme Court knows it's next.

It's why you now see widespread Republican rejection of Congress, 40 percent support for a military coup and the rise of Trump.

The left has gotten what it wanted, radical unilateral rule by one of their own, but it may not like the consequences of electoral dictatorship. And Trump may not be the scariest thing coming down the pike.

It's really up to the Senate to change this scary equation, but too much of the Republican leadership doesn't understand what's going on or the consequences of it. Democrats choose not to understand.

Meanwhile gun control is coming up. Here Obama intends to take on not just Congress, but the Supreme Court. And it's an issue where the anti coalition has remained strong and intact. It's an anti coalition that also includes plenty of Democrats.

The Iran Deal is a political appetizer for the real ugliness that's coming. And if the Republican Congress doesn't figure out how to take on Obama effectively, it's going to pave the way for the base to embrace those who do.

Republicans and Democrats should both be nervous about the implications of that. Trump isn't the scariest thing out there. He's just a tough talking New York billionaire who is fiscally conservative/liberal and socially liberal. If Democrats and Republicans fail to restore the rule of law, a scarier breed of populists could well be waiting for the base to embrace.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #4 

Obama goes full Stalin

Obama just told the secret FISA court to ignore a law he signed four hours earlier and to extend the illegal NSA surveillance.

Tyler Durdern says just when we thought the absurdity that marks every single day of Obama's reign could not possibly be surpassed, we learned that 4 hours (3 hours and 47 minutes to be precise) after Barack Obama vowed to sign a new law banning bulk data collection by the NSA (named, for purely grotesque reasons, the "USA Freedom Act"), the Obama administration asked the secret FISA surveillance court to ignore a federal court that found bulk surveillance illegal and to once again grant the National Security Agency the power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans for six months.

Or, as the Guardian's Spencer Ackerman, who spotted this glaring page out of Josef Stalin's playbook, summarized it:

Tweet453.jpg

According to Ackerman, this latest travesty by the administration "suggests that the administration may not necessarily comply with any potential court order demanding that the collection stop."

Or, in other words, the administration "may" give orders that openly flaunt US laws. From the Guardian:

US officials confirmed last week that they would ask the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court -- better known as the FISA court, a panel that meets in secret as a step in the surveillance process and thus far has only ever had the government argue before it -- to turn the domestic bulk collection spigot back on.

This is a problem because Justice Department national security chief John A Carlin cited a six-month transition period provided in the USA Freedom Act -- passed by the Senate last week to ban the bulk collection -- as a reason to permit an “orderly transition” of the NSA’s domestic dragnet. However, Carlin "did not address whether the transition clause of the Freedom Act still applies now that a congressional deadlock meant the program shut down on 31 May."

So after the second circuit court of appeals already ruled NSA surveillance illegal, and after Congress officially shut down NSA's bulk data collection in its current form, Obama's DOJ decided to singlehandedly order that NSA spying on Americans be extended for at least another 6 months.

Follow the details of how the US Department of "Justice" crushes every semblance thereof:

Carlin asked the FISA court to set aside a landmark declaration by the second circuit court of appeals. Decided on 7 May, the appeals court ruled that the government had erroneously interpreted the Patriot Act’s authorization of data collection as "relevant" to an ongoing investigation to permit bulk collection.

Carlin, in his filing, wrote that the Patriot Act provision remained "in effect" during the transition period.

"This court may certainly consider ACLU v Clapper as part of its evaluation of the government’s application, but second circuit rulings do not constitute controlling precedent for this court,” Carlin wrote in the 2 June application. Instead, the government asked the court to rely on its own body of once-secret precedent stretching back to 2006, which Carlin called “the better interpretation of the statute."

The punchline:

The second circuit court of appeals is supposed to bind only the circuit’s lower courts. But the unique nature of the FISA court -- whose rulings practically never became public before whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations -- has left ambiguous which public court precedents it is obliged to follow.

Said otherwise, the NSA's espionage activity is above the law, any law.

Amusingly, some still harbor hope that "justice" is still a viable concept in the United States, such as the FreedomWorks conservative group, which is asking the FISA court to essentially disband itself:

On Friday, the conservative group FreedomWorks filed a rare motion before the FISA court, asking it to reject the government’s surveillance request as a violation of the fourth amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. FISA court judge Michael Moseman gave the justice department until this coming Friday to respond -- and explicitly barred the government from arguing that FreedomWorks lacks the standing to petition the secret court.

Which, incidentally, is like asking Wall Street to police itself. A quick reminder of what happened there: after gross market manipulation was taking place for years involving trillions of interest-rate products, the person who witnessed it every single day called it, don't laugh, a "conspiracy theory."

Incidentally, "conspiracy theorists" is precisely what all those who accused the NSA of engaging in mass illegal surveillance even before the Snowden revelations, were branded as, and, we are confident, before all is said and done, the "conspiracy theorists" who dare speak the truth against the surreal Orwellian state that the US finds itself in, will be crushed by the administration, both the current and the one that will replace it, whose every day modus operandi is taken straight out of the Stalin memoirs.



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #5 

Garry Kasparov says "We are now facing potentially, disaster beyond belief"

Sara Noble is reporting that Garry Kasparov, Chairman of the Human Rights Foundation, was on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo yesterday and was asked about the dangers presented by another 20 months of Barack Obama.

He said what many are thinking. Barack Obama will have a negative impact.

"I think we are now facing potentially, disaster beyond belief,"

"Obama should understand that normalization of relations with any country means two-way street. And now we can see it only one-way. You know. The deal with Iran, we hear two opposite stories and not just about little things here-and-there…the fundamental differences in most substantial points of the deal."

"Then he shook hands with Raul Castro. It should be a trade. Shaking hands with a dictator..the hand covered with blood. I mean you have to get something in exchange. There’s still, hundreds and hundreds of political prisoners in Cuba."

"So it seems Obama wants these PR opportunities and then he’s vigorously defending his rotten policy, attacking GOP, attacking […] position of America, while offering an olive branch to all American enemies and those who are attacking the values of the free world around the globe."

When asked again about the danger Obama presents over the next 20 months, Kasparov said he thinks that:

"The damage this administration can inflict to the United States and the free world is still hard to calculate."

I agree whole heartedly with Kasparov. Obama will use the 2016 election campaign as cover to push his "fundamental transformation" as far as he can.

The media will be focused on the campaign and Obama will run roughshod over the Republic and the Constitution "under the covers."

In the next 20 months, Obama will rule, not govern. Who's going to stop him?

Hell, the ObamaMedia will even help him.

Just check this out:

It’s never been a secret that the politically regressive 'progressives" on the New York Times editorial board hate freedom. And so, in last Sunday’s lead editorial, they came out full square for a totalitarian state under the iron boot of Supreme Leader Barack Obama.

The Times is concerned that, as the failed Obama presidency heads into the final stretch and his policies become a greater concern to voting Americans, frightened citizens, especially those that have never voted before, will continue replacing tangential establishment Republicans in Congress with robust conservative-libertarian-TEA Partiers.

That is why the Times finds the return of a vibrant GOP opposition party "disturbing" and fears it will "undermine" not just Obama’s policies, but his "very legitimacy as president."


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #6 

Dictates from the dictator -- a baker's dozen

Allan Erickson says from day one, Barack Hussein Obama unleashed blizzards of dictatorial initiatives designed to destroy your personal liberty and our Constitution, all in the name of "fundamental transformation"– translation: the destruction of our way of life, replacing it with an ordered society centered on social justice, environmental protection, and sustainability.  In other words, a communist dictatorship.

Here is a partial list of these initiatives and proposals, running from most recent, offered to make the case that Obama and the Democrat Party, including Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren, are committed to destroying the America the Founders established.  It is useful to be reminded that the Left has always been about force and control.

1. Mandatory voting -- Obama suggests the feds make voting required, with penalties of course. Why propose this now? In order to ensure Democrats control elections in the wake of massive illegal immigration, of course. Obama is glad to have illegals vote and is glad to issue voting rights automatically to illegals, along with a social security card and driver’s license. But Obama opposes voter ID laws. Get the picture?

2. Mandatory support for the global warming agenda -- Global warming ‘deniers’ will be sanctioned by FEMA next year. Congress? We don’t need no stinkin’ Congress! Governors (all Republicans) who disagree about the theory of man-made global warming better get in line, or else. The Feds will cut funding pending obedience!

3. Mandatory ‘getting out of business‘ -- If this administration does not like your ‘high risk’ or ‘morally unacceptable’ business, the Feds will move in and threaten banks processing your transactions. You can be out of business in just a few days. This is perhaps one of government’s most efficient programs, a great way to cull the herd and dispatch malcontents.

4. Mandatory free pass for illegals and felons -- Combine amnesty, open borders, benefits for illegals, tax credit payments, driver’s licenses and get out of jail free cards–and what do you have?  Border chaos and violence, mayhem in the cities, lawlessness encouraged by the government, the breakdown of order, election fraud, security vulnerabilities, and domestic unrest. Never let a good manufactured crisis go to waste! We’ve got to level the playing field in the name of social justice!

5. Mandatory control of the internet -- Take the private and free internet and put it under the control of the federal government, and what do you get? Reduced service, slow load times, managed downloads, content management, censorship, and limits on free speech. All at a cost you can afford! (Do you believe an article like this would get past Obama’s censors?)

6. Gun control -- BHO has no use for the 2nd Amendment and has stated flat out he does not believe average Americans have a right to bear arms. He has issued more than 23 executive orders in attempts to strengthen gun control measures. Most recently, he targeted a certain kind of ammo to ban; but Congress was able to disarm that assault.

7. DISH’n the Crony Socialism -- It is no secret Obama and the Dems enjoy unparalleled financial support from corporations and banks. After all, Dodd/Frank finance ‘reform’ provided unlimited bailout authority. So, if the banks and investment houses and friends of the WH are too big to fail, they’ll gladly fall in line. It’s all a matter of sticks and carrots, rewards and punishments, as DISH discovered, if you are willing to play ball. After all, the powerful ‘in-the-know’ crowd is eager to build that global authority to save the planet and secure their pile.

8. Your Tax Dollars At Work for You! -- Everyone already knows tax money pays for abortions via ObamaCare and outright grants to Planned Parenthood, and that tax money is used in various ways to promote same sex marriage. Executive Orders, BHO’s favorite past time other than golf, are useful advancing the LGBT agenda, especially if such orders violate the 1st Amendment rights of the majority.  Never doubt it, as proven here: if you are a Christian, this president has very special plans for you.

9. Mandatory Right to IRS Audit -- If you filed for tax exempt status with the IRS as a patriot or Tea Party group, you likely enjoyed the scrutiny of the IRS, Lois Lerner, the FBI, the DOJ, and the ATF, among others. You see, if you act on all this liberty talk, you deserve special treatment from the Obama administration. And when the feds stonewall and cover up and delay and withhold documents and claim emails are forever lost, you know the ghost of Nixon is still wandering the halls of power. But this time, there are thousands of them.

10. “With all due respect to the separation of powers . . .” -- President Obama declared his respect in a State of the Union address while he was berating the Justices publicly over their decision in Citizens United.  It was obvious then, as it is now, he has no respect for the separation of powers or the constitutional structure of balanced power among the three branches of government, a balance designed to prevent dictatorship. How could a dictator stomach such a design?

11. Mandatory Healthcare, higher premiums, fines, and declining health -- Promising magical reform (greater services, lower costs, salvation for the poor, miraculous cures, and coverage for preexisting conditions), Obama promised you can keep your plan and your doctor, forcing you to buy what you do not want (and to shell out what you cannot afford), offering subsidies you cannot access on exchanges that do not work. But remember, it has been a great success bankrupting the country and transferring wealth from one sector to another.

12. Control food, water, land, & education -- A global, control freak conspiracy theory? You must be kidding! Agenda 21, Common Core, the environmental movement, and the U.N.? Come on, man! Don’t forget a good dose of population control. Ever hear of Obama’s top science advisor, John Holdren?

13. Wars and Rumors of Wars -- When you have official U.S. military war planners theorizing about how to put down a domestic insurgency, we’ve entered a new era in this country, one threatening the very foundation of liberty and the republic that sustains it. Obama famously proposed a ‘civilian security force’ in addition to law enforcement and the military, back in 2008. That was no idle threat. All responsible dictators must have their own, private security force. How else do you impose your will on a population willing to fight back?

And Obama and friends would have you believe the real threats are Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Scott Walker, Ben Carson, and Bobby Jindal.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #7 

"By hook or by crook," I'll expand government

DictatorObama.jpgNeil Munro is reporting that Barack Obama says he's going to push the limits on presidential power as far as he can go during the last two years of his tenure.

"Where [elected Republicans in Congress] are not willing to work with us, we will do it administratively or we will convene the private sector," he said in a friendly interview with The Huffington Post.

"By hook or by crook," he added.

Obama said his big-government push would "make sure that when I leave this office, that the country is more prosperous, more people have opportunity, kids have a better education, we're more competitive, climate change is being taken more seriously than it was, and we are actually trying to do something about it."

In practice, Obama's agenda includes more progressive control over peoples' salaries, education practices and the energy companies. Each expansion means that state and local governments plus large and small companies will cooperate with regulators to push progressives' goals, instead of trying to please Americans voters, taxpayers and free-market consumers.

Despite the huge victory delivered by GOP voters and swing voters in November, it is not clear if the GOP leaders can -- or will even try -- to block Obama's plan.

The Constitution says the president can only execute Congress' laws, not rewrite them.

Obama's supported by 46 senators, most of the established media, plus a progressive and ethnic coalition that comprises roughly 40 percent of the electorate.

On the other side, the GOP is split, and the mainstream media is relatively small.

Half the party consists of a small-government core that wants to curb progressives' government-magnified power over Americans' economic and social lives.

But the GOP leadership, plus a large chunk of legislators, most lobbyists and campaign donors,, are reluctant to rally voters against Obama's big-government agenda. Instead, they prefer to make deals that provide short-term economic benefits to business groups and to wealthy donors.

Since November, the divided GOP has failed to reduce Obama's progressive power grabs in the health sector, the energy sector, the education sector, the Internet and the immigration system.

In many cases, judges and GOP governors are more effective in blocking Obama's agenda.



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #8 

Arizona passes two huge bills aimed at stopping the Obama agenda

Jason DeWitt is reporting that Arizona just showed the weak knees in Congress how to stand up to Obama's tyranny.

House Bill 2368, introduced by Republican Representative Bob Thorpe of Flagstaff, Arizona, was just passed by the Arizona House.

The bill's goal is to keep the state of Arizona from funding any executive orders issued by President Obama, or policy directives issued by the Department of Justice. That's the way you do it!

From Opposing Views:

According to the Arizona State Legislature website, the bill includes the following provisions:

1. Prohibits this state or any of its political subdivisions from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with an executive order issued by the President of the U.S. that has not been affirmed by a vote of Congress and signed into law as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.

2. Prohibits this state or any of its political subdivisions from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with a policy directive issued by the U.S. DOJ to law enforcement agencies in this state that has not been affirmed by a vote of Congress and signed into law as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.

If the bill becomes a law, Arizona would essentially be independent of federal laws.

Can't wait for a White House that has violated nearly every word of Federal immigration law, pretended the Second Amendment didn't exist, and made a mockery the Constitutional mandate to secure the borders– which has devastated states like Arizona and Texas -- to even try and criticize the Grand Canyon State for daring to stand up to Federal tyranny.

Way to go, Arizona!


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #9 

Obama says he'll make the case to the American People AFTER the Iran deal is made

ObamaFinger.jpg

Daniel Halper is reporting that Barack Obama will wait until after a nuclear deal with Iran is made to make the case to the American people that it's the right thing to do. He made the comment today after being asked about this letter from nearly 50 U.S. senators to Iran, which stated, "The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time."

A member of the press asked Obama, "Can you comment on the Republican letter to Iran?  Can you comment on that?"

"I think it's somewhat ironic to see some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran.  It's an unusual coalition," Obama told the reporter.

"I think what we’re going to focus on right now is actually seeing whether we can get a deal or not.  And once we do -- if we do -- then we’ll be able to make the case to the American people, and I'm confident we’ll be able to implement it."



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #10 

Obama says he will VETO any attempt by Congress to have a say in Iran NUKE negotiations

SooperMexican is reporting that Team Obama once against reiterated how it will rigorously pursue it’s political agenda with complete disregard to Congressional power by saying it would veto any bill that would force him to submit an Iran nuke bill to Congress for approval before signing it.

From the Hill:

President Obama on Saturday threatened to veto a bipartisan bill that would allow Congress to weigh in on any nuclear deal the administration reached with Iran.

"The President has been clear that now is not the time for Congress to pass additional legislation on Iran," National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said in a statement to The Hill.

"If this bill is sent to the President, he will veto it. We are in the final weeks of an international negotiation. We should give our negotiators the best chance of success, rather than complicating their efforts," she added.

The threat comes after a handful of lawmakers introduced a measure requiring Obama to submit text of an agreement with Iran to Congress. It would also prohibit the White House from lifting Iranian sanctions for two months while Congress debated the deal.

Whether Obama needs Congressional approval for such a treaty is debatable. As Jim Geraghty points out, the Constitution seems pretty clear that Congress needs to weigh in on treaties, but on the other hand the kind of treaty being made by Obama may traditionally fall within the sphere of the power of the Executive, as explained here.

Whatever the case is, if Americans rose up and demanded lawmakers face the Iranian threat, Congress could reach the two-thirds vote threshold to overturn Obama’s veto, but most are too busy being obsessed with Bruce Jenner’s sex change and the color of a dress.

Remember, Obama has already recognized Iran's "right of access to and use of nuclear technology."


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #11 

Again, Obama says "I'll act on my own when it's necessary"

CNSNews is reporting that in his weekly address last Saturday, Barack Obama said that in the remaining two years of his presidency he plans to work with Congress but will take unilateral action when he believes he needs to do so.

Obama said in his address:

And we now have the chance to reverse the decades-long erosion of middle-class jobs and incomes. We just have to invest in the things that we know will secure even faster growth in higher-paying jobs for more Americans. We have to make sure our economy, our justice system, and our government work not only for a few, but for all of us.  And I look forward to working together with the new Congress next year on these priorities.

Sure, we’ll disagree on some things. We’ll have to compromise on others. I’ll act on my own when it’s necessary. But I will never stop trying to make life better for people like you.

Because thanks to your efforts, a new foundation is laid. A new future is ready to be written.  We have set the stage for a new American moment, and I’m going to spend every minute of my last two years making sure we seize it.

"I’ll act on my own when it’s necessary."

And Obama will decide when it's necessary -- it's what dictators do.

I just pray that the next Congress dumps Boehner -- but I'm not optimistic.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #12 

Hall of Fame quarterback says Peyton Manning should be a dictator -- like Obama!

Matthew Burke is reporting that prior to last Monday’s "Monday Night Football" game featuring the Denver Broncos versus the Cincinnati Bengals, Hall of Fame quarterback Steve Young, now an ESPN analyst, was asked how Denver quarterback Peyton Manning would deal with the disguises posed by the Bengals defense.

the former San Francisco great said:

"Watch for Peyton to speak to the nation, as the president of the United States would speak to the nation tonight . . . 'I am the dictator! I am the one who’s going to take care of everything.'"

Some pro-Obama sycophants were not pleased with Young’s commentary that referred to dear leader as a "dictator."

The truth hurts!


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
lawyer12

Registered:
Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #13 
Bill Whittle, I am a black American Patriot, and I agree wholeheartedly with what you are stating.
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #14 

Obama's black privilege

Everyone knows it is true, and no one has the courage to say it. The American people are letting Barack Obama destroy this country through illegal executive orders for one reason and one reason only. In his latest "Firewall," Bill Whittle has the courage to speak out and make the case that no one else will make.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #15 

Lame duck Obama gone wild


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #16 

Obama the tyrant

Bruce Thornton says Obama's executive order granting amnesty to 4 million illegal aliens exposes yet again the hypocrisy and cynicism of the most partisan administration in recent history. Typical of a president who seemingly can't remember or doesn't care what he has publicly told the people, Obama went ahead and took action that more than 20 times he had publicly said he couldn't legally take. And he did so not because of some pressing "crisis" of illegals living "in the shadows," a rationale that ignores the real crisis -- illegal deadbeats and thugs serially passing though a porous border in order to create mayhem and disorder in our communities. Rather, this action was a rank partisan gift to vocal activists and clients of the Democratic Party.

More important, however, this latest instance of presidential overreach undermines the most important foundation of the Western political tradition going back to the ancient Greeks -- the suspicion of any necessarily flawed man's excessive power that inevitably flouts the limits imposed by the supreme law of the land.

In ancient Athens, for example, the turannos or "tyrant" was the exemplar of the dangers that flow from excessive power vested in one person. It wasn't that the tyrant was completely evil and oppressive. Many Greek tyrants, like the Athenian Peisistratus, benefitted their communities. Yet given human nature, even a well-meaning leader given excessive power often will abuse it to gratify his own selfish desires, ambitions, and interests at the expense of the law and the freedom of his fellow citizens. In ancient Greek political thought, the tyrant became the monitory example of power's ability to corrupt, and thus often was depicted as violent, paranoid, and excessive in his actions.

The American founders were intimately familiar with this tradition. For them a generalissimo like Julius Caesar, who violated the Roman Republican constitution and ruled as an autocrat until his assassination, was the warning against creating a too powerful executive. One of the most popular Romans of the pre-Revolutionary period was Cato the Younger, who committed suicide rather than submit to Caesar. Joseph Addison's play Cato was the most popular theatrical production of this period. George Washington had it produced for his troops during the grim winter at Valley Forge, and Patrick Henry's "Give me liberty, or give me death" was a paraphrase of a line from the play.

Thus when the Declaration of Independence says of George III, "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States," the word "Tyranny" is not used lightly or metaphorically. George III is being placed into the long tradition of the tyrant whose oppressive rule, as Aristotle wrote, is "arbitrary power . . . which is responsible to no one, and governs all alike, whether equals or betters, with a view to its own advantage, not to that of its subjects, and therefore against their will. No freeman willingly endures such a government." That's why our political ancestors fought the Revolution, and then wrote the Constitution as a safeguard against a future tyrant.

Indeed, in the debates of the delegates to the Constitutional convention, the fear that "power is of an encroaching nature," as George Washington and others said, guided their crafting of the office of chief executive. In the debate over whether the President should be compensated for his service, Benjamin Franklin feared adding money to the attractions of power the chief executive would possess, "for the love of power and the love of money" when united in one office have "the most violent effects." Presidential power will attract "the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits." Hence the Constitutional order checks the power of the executive by the legislature and the judiciary, with Congress given the power to make laws and impeach the executive, and the most democratic assembly, the House of Representatives, given the power of the purse in order to deny an overweening president the funds necessary to advance his ambitions. Finally, the states choose the presidential electors who elect the president, giving the states yet another check on presidential power through term limits and the ballot.

The 22nd amendment limiting the president to 2 terms is testimony to this traditional distrust of power, particularly because it was passed by Congress in 1947, a few years after the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt, who was a popular president elected 4 times. As Thomas Jefferson said in 1807, when the 2-term limit was a custom initiated by George Washington rather than established by law, "if some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life." This healthy fear of power continuing in one man's hands for too long reflected the long tradition of the distrust of power based in turn on a tragic view of a flawed human nature. It explains the great care Alexander Hamilton takes in Federalist 69 to set out the differences between the president and a king, mainly because the former is subjected to numerous limitations on his power, making "difficult to determine whether that magistrate would, in the aggregate, possess more or less power than the Governor of New York." Most important, this fear of power is the central assumption behind the mixed government and balance of governmental powers characterizing our Constitution.

Obama, of course, has rejected this venerable tradition and embraced that of the Progressive movement. Social and technological change, the Progressives argued, have rendered the Constitutional order an anachronism, making necessary a more powerful executive and federal government. Woodrow Wilson's 1908 Constitutional Government in the United States set out the arguments for this idea. He complained that the chief executive was "only the legal executive, the presiding and guiding authority in the application of law and the execution of policy ... He was empowered [by the veto] to prevent laws, but he was not to be given an opportunity to make good ones." That complaint leads directly to Obama's eagerness to make "good laws" as defined not by the people through their representatives, but by himself and his political faction.

And just as Obama, by legislating via executive order fiat, has proven he is impatient with the mixed government that puts limits on his policy ambitions, Wilson rejected the balancing of power and conflicting factions codified in the Constitution. Government, Wilson wrote, "is a living, organic thing, and must like every other government, work out the close synthesis of active parts, which exist only when leadership is lodged in some one man or group of men." Here we see the imperial president's preference for unaccountable technocrats and "experts" like the mendacious Jonathan Gruber, instead of working with the legislators elected by the people and subject to electoral accountability.

Finally, Obama has governed based on the Wilsonian preference for concentrating executive power rather than submitting it to Constitutional checks and balances. "You cannot compound a successful government out of antagonisms," Wilson wrote. Of course, in Wilson's view "successful" is defined as solving technical problems or achieving an ideologically biased "social justice," unlike the Founders, who thought a successful federal government is the one that keeps separate the executive, legislative, and judicial powers and thus protects the freedom of the citizens. And instead of the Constitution's realist acknowledgement that a vast country of various interests cannot be unified in one leader without risking the people's freedom, Wilson wrote that we must "look to the President as the unifying force in our complex system, the leader both of his party and of the nation." The question begged, of course, is unified around what? Which interests or ideals? In reality, they will be reduced to those of one faction that will come to dominate the others, backed by the coercive power of the federal government and its cadres of unelected administrators and bureaucrats.

Obama has governed explicitly as such a "leader." On every issue from the environment and health care to immigration -- 87 pages worth of executive diktats -- he has reduced the various and conflicting interests and ideals of the citizens and states to those of his own party and its progressive ideology. But this usurpation of power has come at the expense of state and individual political rights and freedom, not to mention the undermining of the Constitutional order designed explicitly to protect those rights and freedoms.

Obama has set a precedent that, if left unchecked, will be tempting for other presidents to follow, taking us even further down the road of tyranny. From ancient Athens to the Founders to those traditionalists today who understand the primacy of freedom in the architecture of our political order, such a leader has been characterized by one word -- tyrant.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #17 

What happened?

Thomas Sowell wants to know.

"What happened last week on election day? And what is going to happen in the years ahead?"

The most important thing that happened last week was that the country dodged a bullet. Had the Democrats retained control of the Senate, Barack Obama could have spent his last two years in office loading the federal judiciary with judges who share his contempt for the Constitution of the United States.

Such judges -- perhaps including Supreme Court justices -- would have been confirmed by Senate Democrats, and could spend the rest of their lifetime appointments ruling in favor of expansions of federal government power that would make the freedom of "we the people" only a distant memory and a painful mockery.

We dodged that bullet. But what about the rest of Obama's term?

Pundits who depict Obama as a weak, lame duck president may be greatly misjudging him, as they have so often in the past. Despite the Republican sweep of elections across the country last week, President Obama has issued an ultimatum to Congress, to either pass the kind of immigration law he wants before the end of this year or he will issue Executive Orders changing the country's immigration laws unilaterally.

Does that sound like a lame duck president?

On the contrary, it sounds more like some banana republic's dictator. Nor is Obama making an idle bluff. He has already changed other laws unilaterally, including the work requirement in welfare reform laws passed during the Clinton administration.

The very idea of Congress rushing a bill into law in less than two months, on a subject as complex, and with such irreversible long-run consequences as immigration, is staggering. But there is already a precedent for such hasty action, without Congressional hearings to bring out facts or air different views. That is how ObamaCare was passed. And we see how that has turned out.

People who are increasingly questioning Obama's competence are continuing to ignore the alternative possibility that his fundamental values and imperatives are different from theirs.

You cannot tell whether someone is failing or succeeding without knowing what they are trying to do.

When Obama made a brief public statement about Americans being beheaded by terrorists, and then went on out to play golf, that was seen as a sign of political ineptness, rather than a stark revelation of what kind of man he is, underneath the smooth image and lofty rhetoric.

Obama's refusal to protect the American people by quarantining people coming from Ebola-infected areas -- as was done by Britain and a number of African nations -- is by no means a sign of incompetence. It is a sacrifice of Americans' interests for the sake of other people's interests, as is an assisted invasion of illegal immigrants across our southern borders.

Such actions are perfectly consistent with Obama's citizen of the world vision that has led to such statements of his in 2008: "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that every other country's going to say okay."

In a similar vein, Obama said, "we consume more than 20 percent of the world's oil but have less than 2 percent of the world's oil reserves." In short, Americans are undeservedly prosperous and selfishly consuming a disproportionate share of "the world's output" -- at least in the vision of Barack Obama.

That Americans are producing a disproportionate share of what is called "the world's output" and consuming what we produce -- while paying for our imports -- is not allowed to disturb Obama's vision.

Resentment of the prosperous -- whether at home or on the world stage -- runs through virtually everything Barack Obama has said and done throughout his life. You don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to find the clues. You have to shut your eyes tightly to keep from seeing them everywhere, in every period of his life.

The big question is whether the other branches of government -- Congress and the Supreme Court -- can stop him from doing irreparable damage to America in his last two years. Seeing Obama as an incompetent and weak, lame duck president only makes that task harder.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #18 

Obama’s triple punch to hit Americans in the gut after midterms

Ernest Istook says no matter who wins or loses on election day, Barack Obama is ready with a big new push of his radical agenda the very next day. It includes a triple punch on immigration amnesty, higher health insurance costs and putting thousands of convicts back on the streets early.

Obama says his policies are on the ballot but there's nothing democratic about his agenda. All of these are executive actions that would require heroic efforts by Congress to reverse. Every candidate and incumbent should reveal how they'll fight against Obama's triple whammy that will hit America in the gut between Nov. 5th and the end of this year.

The only thing holding Obama back has been his desire to avoid backlash at the polls against his fellow Democrats. So he has used his typical tactics of deception and propaganda, plus friendly media, to suppress public awareness.

The first roundhouse swing: Unless we could quarantine the White House, Obama's amnesty announcement will sucker punch millions of Americans who could lose jobs to millions of illegal immigrants. Immigration officials already are advertising to purchase up to 39 million plastic ID cards over the next five years. These are to be Employment Authorization Documentation (EAD) cards, two-year work permits like those given by Obama to over 800,00 "Dreamers." Also, Permanent Residency Cards (PRC, often called green cards). Typically, they are good for 10 years.

The solicitation says the base number needed is 4 million cards a year, plus possible "surges" of an extra 5 million ID cards in 2015, 5-million in 2016, 3 million in 2017, 2 million in 2018 and 3 million in 2019. Each is to have embedded RFID chips and holographic images.

Punch No. 2 is more scary news about ObamaCare. Next year's rates should have been revealed Oct. 1st, but that was purposefully delayed until Nov. 14th. Analysts project premiums on the low-cost plans will rise by 14 percent next year. These are high-deductible policies, criticized for requiring a $6,000 deductible to be paid before insurance kicks in. Investors Business Daily reports an expected 64 percent jump in Seattle, rising from $60 to $98 per month. Other examples: In Providence, R.I., the monthly change would be from $72 to $99 per month; Los Angeles from $88 to $111; New York City from $97 to $114.

This ObamaCare wallop is a combination punch. Exemptions for "non-compliant" policies will expire, meaning that people who like their coverage cannot keep it. They'll be knocked down into the Obama mess of high premiums, high deductibles and less choice of doctors. For example, Colorado suffered 22,000 policy cancellations last month alone, with 193,000 more expected in the next year.

Obama's third strike at Americans' jaws is a massive prison release. Expect 20,000 inmates to receive executive clemency in addition to the 36,000 illegal immigrant convicts set free in 2013. Most will be minorities and that's the heart of the matter. Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have often complained that minorities are sentenced for too long, especially for drug offenses. The Justice Department announced this "New Clemency Initiative" in April, then invited criminal defense lawyers, public defenders and the ACLU to do the screening for who they think should be turned loose.

They claim that violent offenders will be weeded out. But this administration is notorious for announcing supposedly strict guidelines but failing to follow them.

There's also a major risk because a high number may include those recruited in prison by radical Islamists. Those jihadists focus on black American prisoners who want revenge against supposed injustice. The risk is that another Alton Nolen may be among those put on our streets. Nolen, an Islamist convert, was let out of Oklahoma's prisons early and now is accused of beheading a co-worker in his pursuit of jihad revenge.

Obama's plans are in place for the one-two-three punch on amnesty, ObamaCare and get-out-of-jail-early. The last remaining barrier protecting us from Obama-unchained is his need to protect fellow Democrats on Nov. 4th. That date is like a boxing bell, signaling Obama to unleash his barrage.

The majority of Americans who already are upset at Obama may think that his deception and radicalism can't get any worse. Unfortunately, they can. Just wait until after Election Day. We need a huge and bold crop of new lawmakers to fight back against Obama's triple punch to the gut of America.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #19 

A second Declaration of Independence

DOTUS.jpg

In a piece for Breitbart.com, columnist David Shapiro offered a response to the current “hostile” president and his tyrannical regime in a “Second Declaration of Independence,” which lays out (in dead-on 18th-century style) Obama’s offenses, reestablishes the once self-evident truths of a free society, and calls out the “culpable media apparatus” for its denial of Americans’ “right to be legitimately heard.”

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to assume that their president, hostile to the principles that formed the nation and determined to act with malice toward its inhabitants by suppressing their rights and enabling its enemies to prosper in their attempts to destroy it, must be confronted, a rational response for the nation is to encumber itself no more with such a president and reject his authority and the acolytes who carry out his wishes.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, but their gifts are varied, and it is through the voluntary efforts of the fortunate among them to care for the less fortunate, not the province of a government to intrude on the natural imbalances that arise from the human condition, that the sanctity of ethically earned property is not to be compromised by a government eager to impose its will to address such imbalances, that when a president or member of the government flagrantly ignores the restraints of the Constitution of the United States they be punished with expulsion from the government; that when despotism in the form of such behavior arises it is the duty of the people to throw off such government and elect representatives who honor the foundational principles that underlie the nation’s existence.

The sufferance of these United States impels action to ensure the existence of the nation. The history of the present president is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his minions to be charged with crimes both high and low in order to present an image utterly hostile to the truth; he has endangered the nation both from enemies abroad who have sworn its destruction by refusing to condemn their governments and in many cases, aiding and abetting them, and those enemies who enter the country defying its laws and intent on defying the laws once ensconced in the nation; he has invaded the sacred privacy of individuals by tolerating the use of government apparatus to spy on them without their knowledge; he has championed the rights of the living to deny the right to life to those about to join their ranks; he has created enmity among the populace, separating one group from another with the use of separatist language rather than the language of unification, he has endangered those most at risk as they serve their country by destroying the defensive tools intended for the protection of the nation; he has supported the destruction of the free use of faith that is the pillar of Western civilization; he has appropriated the power granted to other branches of government in order to further ends that cannot be legislated because there is legitimate opposition to them; he has willfully ignored the future financial demise of the nation while indulging in spending doomed to ensure the demise is a certainty.

We have warned of our grievances, though a culpable media apparatus has denied us the right to be legitimately heard; we have tolerated the abuse of our citizens by those who reside in our nation but do not share its founding principles; we have trusted in the process through which the nation has traditionally resolved its differences; we have watched as those who do not share American values usurp the rights of legislators to make the law by invoking a willing judiciary to circumvent such legislators.

We, therefore, the people of the United States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do swear, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these States, that we are independent of said president and his minions, that we resolve not to eschew the rule of law and remove such persons from power by force, but rather to uncompromisingly and unstintingly work without hesitation to replace them now and forevermore by voting them out of power, and continually voting them out of power until their values are seen for the enemy of our principles that they truly are. We have sworn our fealty to our Constitution, and its eternal continuance, and may the Supreme Judge of the world strengthen us in the battle for the soul of the nation that lies ahead.

Shapiro then moves into Obama’s "history of repeated injuries and usurpations," including refusing to assent to the laws of the country, endangering the nation abroad, invading "the sacred privacy of individuals," and undermining the separation of powers.

Shapiro also calls out the "culpable media" who, he writes, have denied us the right to be legitimately heard," turning a deaf ear to Americans’ grievances as we've had to watch "those who do not share American values usurp the rights of legislators to make the law by invoking a willing judiciary to circumvent such legislators."

Shapiro ends the piece by appealing to "the Supreme Judge of world for the rectitude of our intentions," and declaring "that we resolve not to eschew the rule of law" by using force, but by voting them out "until their values are seen for the enemy of our principles that they truly are."



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #20 

The Constitution is dead -- long live the executive dictatorship

Ben Shapiro says there is almost nothing Barack Obama cannot do. This week, we found out Obama's IRS not only targeted conservative nonprofit applicants with impunity but then destroyed the emails that could have illuminated the process behind such targeting. Meanwhile, the attorney general -- the executive officer charged with fighting government criminality -- continues to stonewall an independent prosecutor, maintaining along with his boss that there is not a "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS.

On the southern border, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been converted from a policing agency to a humanitarian-aid agency, as the Obama administration encourages thousands of unaccompanied minors to flood Texas and Arizona. Those illegal immigrants are being shuttled around the southwest and released into the general population, and told by activists that they are just months away from amnesty.

Across the seas, Obama is unilaterally destroying America's anti-terror infrastructure. Iraq has become the preserve of the al-Qaida offshoot ISIS and the Iranian-connected Shiite government -- the specific outcome the United States originally wanted to avoid in the country. Afghanistan will soon devolve back into a Taliban-led cesspool for terror. And the Obama administration continues to fund a Palestinian government that includes terrorist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and that has now kidnapped an American citizen, along with two other Israeli boys.

Nobody in the executive branch has been punished for Benghazi, Libya, Fast and Furious, serious national security leaks to major news outlets, violations of civil rights by the National Security Agency or any other major scandal.

The Obama administration has seized authority to regulate health care, carbon emissions and labor relations in unforeseen ways.

And no one will stop the executive branch. Impeachment will not solve the problem of a 3 million-strong regulatory branch in which accountability is a fantasy. The legislature has no interest in stopping the growth of the executive, given that legislators seek re-election by avoiding responsibility, and granting more power to the executive avoids such responsibility. And the judiciary seems unwilling to hem in the executive branch at all, given its decisions on the Environmental Protection Agency and ObamaCare.

So what's left? An elected tyranny in which the whims of the president and all of his men decide the fate of millions. The founders would have fought such a government with every fiber of their being -- and, in fact, they did fight such a government. The question now is whether state governments, elected officials and the people themselves will be willing to take the measures necessary to do the same.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #21 

Obama "ruling like a banana republic"

Krauthammer says Obama has "set back the cause of liberalism," he's "ruling like a banana republic"


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #22 

The dictator affirms his lawlessness

Tweet37.jpg



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #23 
OnlyRacists.jpg


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #24 

The dictator's weekly address from the White House, May 17, 2014

ProgressingAmerica says this is tyranny. We have reached the point to where Obama now openly states that he is a despot, a dictator.

King Barry I says:

"Where Congress won't act, I will" (0:33)

"I'll keep doing what I can on my own" (3:27)

"All of them can be done without Congress" (4:02)

"In the meantime I'll do whatever I can" (4:10)

That's four times in four minutes, that Obama openly put his tyrannical beliefs on display as well as intent to commit more unilateral imperial activity. At the Constitutional Convention, June 1st, 1787, Roger Sherman said the following:

"I favor appointment by the Legislature, and for making him absolutely dependent on that body, as it is the will of that which was to be executed. An independence of the Executive on the supreme Legislature, is in my opinion, the very essence of tyranny, if there was any such thing."

You know who was independent of the legislature? King George III.

Now, who else is independent of the legislature? King Barry the first. Just watch the video, he will tell you. Four times.

It matters not what he wants to do nor why. An executive not bound by any checks or balances is a dictator.

I put the video at the end so you don't have to listen to this guy, but you can if you can stand it:


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #25 

A trick question

WhichOne.jpg 



__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Help fight the
ObamaMedia

The United States Library of Congress
has selected TheObamaFile.com for inclusion
in its historic collection of Internet materials

Be a subscriber

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011 - 2017
All rights reserved