Fifth Circuit Blocks Obama Illegal Illegal Immigration Diktats

Breaking: Fifth Circuit upholds injunction against executive amnesty. Maybe this will be the harvest of tons of straw that breaks the Big Media back and forces open a discussion of Obama’s illegal illegal immigration diktats.

For so long we have been one of the few outlets that has reported with seriousness on the ramifications, treacheries, and lies which led a brave Texas judge to oppose Barack Obama’s illegal illegal immigration diktats by issuing an injunction against them. The reason proffered by Big Media for scant grudging coverage of such a big story has been that the actions of a federal district judge don’t amount to much. Big Media refused to cover the story saying that maybe if the Fifth Circuit Appeals Court weighed in then maybe the public would be informed by Big Media about Obama’s illegal illegal immigration diktats. “Maybe” has just arrived:

Appeals court refuses to lift hold on Obama immigration action

A federal appeals court refused Tuesday to lift a temporary hold on President Obama’s executive action that could shield from deportation as many as 5 million immigrants illegally living in the U.S.

The U.S. Justice Department had asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse a Texas judge who agreed to temporarily block the president’s plan in February, after 26 states filed a lawsuit alleging Obama’s action was unconstitutional. But two out of three judges on a court panel voted to deny the government’s request.

It wasn’t immediately clear if the government would appeal, either to the full appeals court in New Orleans or to the U.S. Supreme Court. [snip]

Justice Department lawyers sought a stay while they appealed the injunction. They argued that keeping the temporary hold interfered with the Homeland Security Department’s ability to protect the U.S. and secure the nation’s borders. They also said immigration policy is a domain of the federal government, not the states.

But, in Tuesday’s ruling, 5th Circuit judges Jerry Smith and Jennifer Walker Elrod denied the stay, saying in an opinion written by Smith, that the federal government lawyers are unlikely to succeed on the merits of that appeal. [snip]

The Justice Department has also asked the 5th Circuit to reverse Hanen’s overall ruling that sided with the states. A decision on that appeal, which will be argued before the court in July, could take months.

Not only has the Fifth Circuit refused to allow Obama’s illegal illegal immigration diktats to continue, the Fifth Circuit has signaled that the entire legal underpinnings of Obama’s illegal immigration diktats are, well, illegal and not likely to prevail.

It’s a 42 page decision (which may be read in full HERE) which will likely prevail even if Obama foolishly asks the Fifth Circuit to hear the case en banc. As we predicted, the wheels of justice grind slowly and the courts are finally moving against Obama as he walks the short green mile away from his treacherous occupation of the White House.

Share

136 thoughts on “Fifth Circuit Blocks Obama Illegal Illegal Immigration Diktats

  1. We also made the case that illegal immigrants had to be careful lest they “out” themselves for the foolish reason that they believe Obama. The Fifth Circuit acknowledges that indeed is a concern on page 41:

    http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/Texas%205th%20Circuit%20deny%20stay%20NLJ.pdf

    The states say the injunction maintains the separation of powers and ensures that a major new policy undergoes notice and comment. And as a prudential matter, if the injunction is stayed but DAPA is ultimately invalidated, deportable aliens would have identified themselves without receiving the expected benefits. The public interest favors maintenance of the injunction, and even if that were not so, in light of the fact that the first three factors favor the states and that the injunction merely maintains the status quo while the court considers the issue, a stay pending appeal is far from justified

    Obama cannot be trusted by friend nor foe.

  2. They get it:

    “Put delicately, is the announced discretion
    “pretext”?”

    “Put indelicately, as the district court held, is the Executive being
    “disingenuous”? Texas, 2015 WL 648579, at *53.”

  3. This is a very well reasoned opinion.

    So far, it looks bullet proof.

    Unless, the bad guys can get to the cowardly chief justice–again.

    NYT is sure to say this is a(nother) test of whether he is a reactionary or a judge who believes in justice.

    The only intolerant force in the equation is the hard left.

    More people are seeming to notice.

  4. Scalia is the designated SC Justice to field appeals from the 5th Circuit. At least in conservative circles, the thinking is that he wouldn’t entertain stepping into a battle where the 5th Circuit has upheld a District Court ruling.

  5. …if the injunction is stayed but DAPA is ultimately invalidated, deportable aliens would have identified themselves without receiving the expected benefits.

    Well Hells Bells, they are expecting the freakin’ moon because Dear Leader promised them a free ride from us working class Americans. Boo hoo, boo effin; hoo they have to find another host to bleed dry.

    Thank you Texas for having the coconuts to take this by the tail!!!!

    As always…Bravo our Big Pink Admin!

  6. This was written in April but now not only has the Fifth Circuit decided we can also see how the 5th Circuit will decide in future:

    http://www.law360.com/articles/648991/5th-circ-to-hear-immigration-action-arguments-in-july

    Law360, New York (April 28, 2015, 8:48 PM ET) — The Fifth Circuit has tentatively scheduled the next oral argument session on the federal government’s bid to lift a block on President Obama’s deferred deportation policies created by his executive actions for early July, the appeals court said on Tuesday.

    In a short, two-page order sent to a total of 38 attorneys representing Texas and the 25 other states that filed the case, the federal government and a number of amici curiae, the Fifth Circuit said that oral argument has been tentatively set for the week of July 6.

    The appeals court will weigh whether to rule in favor of the states or the federal government on the merits of the government’s appeal. The government has asked the appeals court to stay a Texas court’s Feb. 16 injunction on the two new immigration policies — the expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program for immigrants who came to the U.S. as minors, as well as the creation of a similar program for certain immigrant parents, known as DAPA — which allow certain immigrants to defer deportation and apply for work authorization.

  7. Just the fact that 26 states are suing the United States government should give us all pause. If I were President and more than half of the 50 states were suing me, I think I’d stop and think about whether I’m taking the right approach.

  8. Chalk one up for the Good Guys! O is or Over. It is about time to stop the nation destroying practices of the Obola Administration.

  9. Dear Leader doesn’t give a rat’s ass about solving or even addressing the illegal immigration problem. If he did, he would have passed comprehensive legislation in 2009/2010 when his party controlled both houses of Congress with a veto proof majority in the Senate. He could have passed anything he wanted. His priority was Obamacare and Dodd-Frank.

    He just wants the immigration issue as a sledgehammer against the Republicans. Actually fixing the problem takes away a political issue (and an ongoing extortion opportunity).

  10. I think Hillary has played her cards right on this and kept the pressure on the courts to deal with the Executive Overreach. The devil is in the details on getting this issue set to rights. But you need a competent POTUS who loves their country to get that done.

    I would love to be able to welcome the poor, tired huddled masses of the world, but we just cannot absorb them all at once. We need to fix the world, not bring it here.

    The world is full of impoverished souls and it is a sad, sorry state of affairs that the Globalists exploit that for profits instead of trying to improve the world society. Like locusts they go around to these third world nations under the pretext that it is some kind of improvement for them. There are horror stories out of China where they are exporting their peasants and dissidents to “factories” in Africa. World trade, my ass, it is the return of the sweatshop and the advancement of tyranny. Anyone who supports TPP and the likes is a pig.

  11. For so long we have been one of the few outlets that has reported with seriousness on the ramifications, treacheries, and lies which led a brave Texas judge to oppose Barack Obama’s illegal illegal immigration diktats by issuing an injunction against them.
    —————–
    Amen and thank you admin.
    ————————
    WaPo is agreeing with admin. Think of that.

    Obama’s legacy is increasingly in legal jeopardy
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/05/26/obama-courts/
    And that article links internally to [A brief history of United States Courts v. Barack Obama]

  12. holdthemaccountable
    May 26, 2015 at 8:04 pm
    ————————

    That article is anomalous. Most of the lame stream media seem to be minimizing it as a legal technicality.

    I would like to send the judge some flowers. He is brave. I am surprised the thugs have not has him killed. I bet he sleeps with one eye open.

  13. I would like to send the judge some flowers. He is brave. I am surprised the thugs have not has him killed.

    —-

    Texas believes in packin’

    The judge probably has lots of protection, hopefully.

  14. Tony Stark

    Admin, you are truly an oracle that we can all rely on.

    —–
    Absolutely true, Tony.

    Admin has helped us stay sane over the past 8 years.

  15. “Today, two judges of the Fifth Circuit chose to misrepresent the facts and the law,” a White House spokeswoman, Brandi Hoffine, said. “The president’s actions were designed to bring greater accountability to our broken immigration system, grow the economy and keep our communities safe. They are squarely within the bounds of his authority, and they are the right thing to do for the country.”

    You’d think that after pushing their luck lying to Judge Hanlon, the Richard Craniums at the White House wouldn’t be quite so brazen insulting federal appellate judges…

  16. Lu4Puma

    I would love to be able to welcome the poor, tired huddled masses of the world, but we just cannot absorb them all at once. We need to fix the world, not bring it here.

    _________________

    I agree. Most of us are compassionate and want to rescue those in need of rescuing. But, if in offering blanket amnesty to millions of illegals, as Barack wants to do, this country is significantly weakened, as it is likely to be, we have helped no one. We need to regain the strength this country has lost since Barack was gifted with the presidency. We will then be in a better position to develop more viable, lasting solutions to this and other problems.

    ________

    Admin, I add my appreciation and admiration to that already eloquently expressed by my fellow Pinkers.

  17. Poor Norah needs to get with the script. Doesn’t she know she’s supposed to be grilling him, not nodding in agreement?

  18. Excerpts of the Fix article:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/05/26/obama-courts/

    President Obama’s legacy is increasingly in legal jeopardy

    President Obama’s second-term agenda, it seems, is in the hands of the courts.

    Same-sex marriage. Obamacare. Climate change. And now immigration. And in many cases, there is significant doubt about whether his signature initiatives will stand legal scrutiny. [snip]

    The drama is sure to ensue for months, writes the Post’s David Nakamura, and throw into doubt whether the fight over all of Obama’s executive actions on immigration will be settled before he leaves office in January 2017.

    Here’s a look at other Obama agenda items that are now in the court’s hands, and where they stand.

    Same-sex marriage [snip]

    The Supreme Court went Obama’s way in 2013 when it allowed the federal government to recognize legally married same-sex couples.

    Obamacare [snip]

    Challengers say the law as written only supports subsidies for the 16 states that set up exchanges.

    If the court rules in King v. Burwell that those subsidies are unconstitutional, upwards of 8 million people in 36 states could lose their subsidies. It would undo a key part to the Affordable Care Act — and possibly unravel the whole law.

    Climate Change

    Obama told U.S. Coast Guard cadets last week that failing to act on climate change will “set a course for disaster.” At the same time, the Supreme Court is debating whether his method of cutting down on greenhouse gas emissions is even constitutional.

    The Supreme Court heard arguments in March on whether the Environmental Protection Agency’s crackdown on coal- and fire-powered plants’ mercury emissions failed to consider undue costs on the power plants.

    The justices are expected to share their decision in June. But it is expected to be just an early challenge to the president’s executive climate change initiatives, say environmental watchers. (Sensing a theme here?)

    More immigration

    The lawsuit against Obama’s plan to shield 5 million additional undocumented immigrants from deportation isn’t the only court challenge to the president’s executive actions on immigration.

    House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) is considering putting to a vote a separate lawsuit against the president for expanding the program in November. This is in addition to the vote the House of Representatives took (along party lines) last summer to sue the president over his overall use of executive authority.

    Neither of Congress’ lawsuits has made its way to a higher court — but with Obama’s luck lately, they just might.

  19. For the record, the case we will be watching next term is Evenwel v. Abbott. Evenwel implicates voting rights, congressional redistricting, immigration, and the entire political history and future of the country.

    https://www.texastribune.org/2015/05/26/us-supreme-court-hear-texas-redistricting-case/

    The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear a case that centers on how Texas draws its political districts, a longtime point of dispute between the state and voting rights advocates.

    The high court said it will take up Evenwel v. Abbott, which involves whether Texas should use total population or voting age population when composing districts. The debate is especially pertinent in Texas, where some districts include many people living in the country illegally who are not eligible to vote. [snip]

    At the heart of their argument is the disparity between the number of eligible voters in rural and urban areas. For example, the project has noted that Evenwel comes from a mostly rural district with about 584,000 voters, while an adjacent, mostly urban district has just 372,000. The difference, according to the plaintiffs, means the urban voters have more influence.

    The justices’ 1964 ruling in Reynolds v. Sims held that state legislative districts have to be about equal in population, but it remains unsettled how the high court defines population. Evenwel and Pfenninger are seeking to show voting age population, not total population, is more congruent with the Supreme Court’s idea of “one person, one vote.”

  20. It’s hard to know where Abbott’s sympathies might be on this one. He could actually support Evenwel’s claim as it would gut the voting power of urban districts and increase the voting power of rural Republican districts.

    Abbott is an interesting guy. As Texas Attorney General, he built a substantial Solicitor’s office with the stated intention of Texas playing an active role in pushing constitutional cases to the Supreme Court. Not just defending Texas, but going out looking for plaintiffs and cases. For example, Texas as the lead in the current immigration case.

    I think the first case Ted Cruz argued before the Supreme Court after being appointed as Solicitor General by Abbott was a 2005 Texas redistricting case where a Latino voter group was challenging the new Republican gerrymander replacing the 1991 Democratic gerrymander and a subsequent court ordered gerrymander.

    Cruz won the overall case, with the exception of one district sent back for reconsideration:

    http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2005/2005_05_204

    It’s a very entertaining oral argument with a lot of give and take on redistricting issues.

  21. Just the fact that 26 states are suing the United States government should give us all pause. If I were President and more than half of the 50 states were suing me, I think I’d stop and think about whether I’m taking the right approach.
    ———

    Well, first of all, you are not the president.

    Second, over half the states challenged Obamacare and that did not stop him or that trembling tower of tapioca John Roberts.

    Third, there is no evidence that reasonable objections ever have or ever will cause Obama to question what he is doing.

    Fourth, whenever people object to his actions, Obama’s pathological response is to summon his bloggers and big media cronies to the white house, give them their marching orders and launch withering coordinated attacks against those who object.

    He did it to Hillary and Bill during the 2008 campaign.

    And he has been trying to do it to FOX News—which has caused their ratings to surge.

    In sum, Obama is a textbook example of a sociopath, and is incompetent.

    Simply put, you cannot apply the reasonable man standard to a sociopath.

  22. Admin

    For the record, the case we will be watching next term…

    ——-
    What is: “next term”?

    I keep thinking in college semesters…

  23. Now Kraut-hammer is saying if the Republicans win the court cases the filed on immigration and Obamacare subsidies then they have a problem as he puts it because then they can no longer kick the can down the road and say its in the hands of the courts. They will have to act–meaning legislate–meaning come up with a solution which the base may not like politically. But this is what the Constitution requires of its legislators. Krauthammer thinks this is bad, but I think it is good. We have seen enough of their promising one thing and doing the opposite. Let them try it on these two issues, and lose in November. If the best they can do is behave like potted plants, then they do not belong in Congress.

  24. Wbboei… May 27 at 1:59 a.m. I’d like to send this on to others…please list the source.

  25. The current immigration case has already been kicked down the road until after the 2016 election. I don’t think Hanlon is going to be a big hurry to do the feds any favors and decide the case tomorrow after they lied to him. So, it will be “in the courts” for a while.

    The Obamacare case could create a real nightmare. I think it would be pretty much impossible to jam a fix through the House of Representatives. The Republicans would be in a tough spot, but so would the Dems. It is, after all, their bill. They wrote it. And, obviously, should have read it before passing it….

  26. Krauthammer’s comments were from the nightly panel at the end of Bret Bahre’s 6pm newscast on Fox News. Realclearpolitics often posts video from the panel (Krauthammer especially) the next day.

  27. As always, money talks (and votes).
    ________

    From The Guardian UK:

    (snip)

    Using data from the Federal Election Commission, this chart shows all donations that corporate members of the US Business Coalition for TPP made to US Senate campaigns between January and March 2015, when fast-tracking the TPP was being debated in the Senate:

    Out of the total $1,148,971 given, an average of $17,676.48 was donated to each of the 65 “yea” votes.

    The average Republican member received $19,673.28 from corporate TPP supporters.

    The average Democrat received $9,689.23 from those same donors.

    The amounts given rise dramatically when looking at how much each senator running for re-election received.

    Two days before the fast-track vote, Obama was a few votes shy of having the filibuster-proof majority he needed. Ron Wyden and seven other Senate Democrats announced they were on the fence on 12 May, distinguishing themselves from the Senate’s 54 Republicans and handful of Democrats as the votes to sway.

    In just 24 hours, Wyden and five of those Democratic holdouts – Michael Bennet of Colorado, Dianne Feinstein of California, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Patty Murray of Washington, and Bill Nelson of Florida – caved and voted for fast-track.

    Bennet, Murray, and Wyden – all running for re-election in 2016 – received $105,900 between the three of them. Bennet, who comes from the more purple state of Colorado, got $53,700 in corporate campaign donations between January and March 2015, according to Channing’s research.

    Almost 100% of the Republicans in the US Senate voted for fast-track – the only two non-votes on TPA were a Republican from Louisiana and a Republican from Alaska.

    Senator Rob Portman of Ohio, who is the former US trade representative, has been one of the loudest proponents of the TPP. He received $119,700 from 14 different corporations between January and March, most of which comes from donations from Goldman Sachs ($70,600), Pfizer ($15,700), and Procter & Gamble ($12,900). Portman is expected to run against former Ohio governor Ted Strickland in 2016 in one of the most politically competitive states in the country.

    Seven Republicans who voted “yea” to fast-track and are also running for re-election next year cleaned up between January and March. Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia received $102,500 in corporate contributions. Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, best known for proposing a Monsanto-written bill in 2013 that became known as the Monsanto Protection Act, received $77,900 – $13,500 of which came from Monsanto.

    (snip)

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/27/corporations-paid-us-senators-fast-track-tpp

  28. This was a 2 to 1 decision.

    The question is who was the dissenter?

    Who is the jurist who blindly supports Obama and ignores the rule of law? Where did he come from?

    Is he an Ivy Leaguer?

    Did he perchance go to Yale, where the sociological school of jurisprudence prevails over the Constitution?

    And by any stretch of the imagination, was he appointed by the Great Satan Obama?

    The answer to all these questions is, of course, yes.

    Finally, if you were to see who he voted for and contributed money to I have a sneaking suspicion I know the answer.

    The only question I have is was he a bundler—like the US Attorney for the DC Circuit?

    Since he was not a judge at the time, there is nothing unethical per se about this.

    But it sure as hell tells you where he is coming from

    And, one begins to wonder whether an appointment does not entail a non-explicit quid pro quo.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_A._Higginson

  29. One of the lies perpetrated by the ruling class is that there is a big difference between the democrat and the republican parties. On most matters the only difference is which set of donors get to feed at the public trough—or “our turn to rule” as fat ass Howard the whore Dean so delicately put it. Well . . . if that is a carefully constructed illusion, then what is the underlying reality. The underlying reality is that we do not have a democracy, and for all its preening and pretensions of conscience, the ruling class of my generation and those which have come after, are more piggish and condescending to the people of this nation than ever before. How does it benefit the nation to have a judge who knows only the elite drawing rooms of high society and the rarified atmosphere of the elites deciding cases which involve the fate of millions of people, whose lives he does not understand, whose shoes he has never walked in, because they do not say Gucci on them? Would I prefer to have revolutionary courts, staffed by dissidents who demand justice now in the fine tradition of Robespierre? No, but that is the typical all or nothing bullshit you get from this administration. Ideally, you would have judges who understand the real world, and are capable of rendering opinions that do not have what the late Judge Bork accurately described as the smell of the lamp. More than any other, this administration is staffed by Ivy Leaguers who elevate ideology over fact, and arrogate to themselves the divine right of kings. It is sickening to behold, and reality is giving the whole lot of them a gut punch that history would be unwise to ignore.

  30. Ideally, you would have judges who understand the real world, and are capable of rendering opinions that do not have what the late Judge Bork accurately described as the smell of the lamp.
    ———
    From what I can tell, the two judges from the fifth circuit who upheld the rule of law embody that higher tradition of jurisprudence, which looks past self preening and doing the handiwork of the elites, to doing what is right for the people of this nation and respecting the Constitution. To my knowledge, neither of them come from the Obama stable.

    Interestingly, those judges went to Harvard and Yale respectively, but through experience as state trial court judges, they acquired a sense of reality, and overcame that disability. If memory serves, Judge Hanan went to Baylor, which explains why he is grounded in reality and sound thinking and courage, in the best traditions of the state of Texas.

  31. freespirit:

    TPA fast-track was a “milker” bill, perfectly designed with suitable dire threats and heated rhetoric on both sides, to “milk” or extort payments from interest groups on both sides. If you dove into the numbers, you would see that pro-trade business groups and anti-trade labor groups were milked or extorted equally.

    Peter Schweizer’s excellent book Extortion details the money that flows on both sides in the days immediately before the vote on any bill in Congress.

    It should not be a surprise that Congressional votes are pay to play.

  32. Well, color me not surprised – not about votes being bought and sold. Not about people being bought and soul. Not about posters with hidden agendas.

  33. Oh, no…I smell another book report coming from one of Schweizer’s books. Batten down the hatches.

  34. Politico has a new article today on the interest group pressure being applied to Congress members on the TPA vote.

  35. Video at link.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/26/jorge-ramos-admits-true-feelings-to-ann-coulter-no-limit-to-number-of-mexicans-allowed-into-america%E2%80%A8/

    MIAMI, Florida — Conservative columnist and 10-time New York Times bestselling author Ann Coulter steamrolled Fusion host Jorge Ramos in an appearance Tuesday filled with dramatic moments, none more interesting than where Coulter got Ramos to admit he doesn’t believe there should be a limit to how many Mexicans the United States will allow into this country—either legally or illegally.

    “One last question and you asked we ask on Twitter: Tell me anything new that is not known generally,” Ramos asked Coulter to wrap the interview about her new book, Adios America.

    “Well, obviously you brought one up: 30 million illegals, not 11,” Coulter fired back, referencing a fiery opening exchange to the interview.

    “It’s 11, it’s 11,” Ramos insisted. “Not 30 million.”

    Coulter trekked forward with her answer. “More Nigerians than English since the 1970 immigration law,” she said. “Oh, that the people who passed the 1965 immigration law—Teddy Kennedy, the rest of the Democrats—they swore up and down it would not change the ethnic composition of this country. This has been the most dramatic historic ethnic change to any nation in world history. This is with lying to the American people—and without even consulting the American people on it, which is why I’m particularly enraged that every night I can see enthusiasm on MSNBC for ‘the browning of America, the browning of America, the browning of America.’ But if I say, ‘I don’t like what you’ve done,’ oh, that’s racist.”

    Ramos followed up by asking Coulter if he thinks America is a “stronger nation” because it’s “more diverse, more tolerant.”

    “It’s not more diverse, it’s more Mexican,” Coulter shot back.

    “I think it’s more diverse—much more diverse,” Ramos replied.

    After Ramos said he thinks “diversity” is “fantastic” and “beautiful,” Coulter wrapped the full segment with a question of her own for him.

    We have taken in one quarter of the entire Mexican population,” Coulter asked him. “At what point will we have taken in enough, in your view?

    That’s where Ramos made his stunning admission.

    “I think that with the legal system—“ he started to answer.

    “Half the Mexican population? The entire Mexican population?” Coulter kept pressing.

    “No, I think with the legal system we wouldn’t need and we wouldn’t be having hundreds of people dying crossing the border,” Ramos replied.

    “That isn’t an answer to the question,” Coulter corrected him. “One quarter of the Mexican population. How much more do we have to take?

    Ramos dodged again, essentially admitting he supports no limit whatsoever.

  36. Ramos talking over and twisting the facts makes me crazy angry.

    I HATE when people are so effin’ rude they talk over the person they are ‘debating’ and to try and drown out the other person’s voice and opinions or facts.

    Coulter was absolutely correct.

  37. Democratic presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton is making her first visit to South Carolina since announcing her candidacy earlier this year.

    Clinton is scheduled to deliver a keynote address on Wednesday to the South Carolina House Democratic Women’s Caucus and the South Carolina Democratic Women’s Council at their Third Annual Day in Blue.

    The campaign says Clinton is also holding discussions with minority women small business owners and making brief remarks to the state House and Senate Democratic caucuses.

    South Carolina hosts the South’s first 2016 primary and is important for Democrats because it’s the contest with a large number of black voters.

    http://www.thestate.com/news/state/south-carolina/article22405941.html

  38. admin
    May 27, 2015 at 2:21 pm
    ——
    Slowly, surely, and hopefully not to late, we are getting to some hard truths and binary decisions. Mexico is exporting its lower classes and social problems to this nation, and destroying our middle class. Shorn of the formalities, all the southern poverty law marxism, and their earnest desire to bring down this nation, becuse tht is another hard truth and binary decision, the air is clear of big media pollution, they have zero credibilty left, and the country as a whole will decide the issue. There is nowhere left for the left to run and hide, and the elites have been outed as well—RINOs and DINOs alike. The issue has been joined, and we are one megadisaster away from having it decided with finality. And for everyone who makes the argument that this Ramos goon does that we should accept this as a fact, because capitalists want cheap labor, they need to be reminded that that was also the justification for slavery, and I would hope we do not need to fight a civil war over that issue again, because if we do, the elites will not be able to buy their way out of it/

  39. The worst part of it is the suggestion that the illegals are doing us a favor by taking our jobs because this support our standard of living. That is the make weight bullshit that Ramos is dishing out. I say automate and turn them away at the border. It is like the phony argument Obama tried to make before the fifth circuit that even though this illegal immigration will cost states and arm and a leg, they will get it all back and more because these lawbreakers will suddenly, miraculously, come out of the shadows and start paying taxes to the IRS, knowing that the IRS by its typical incompetence will give their identities away to thieves inadvertently. Well, as an old Teamster I new uses to say when he heard arguments like that: I may be dumb, but I am not stupid. Obama, however, is convinced that we are both, and half the electorate has managed twice to prove him right–on the only issue he has ever been right on.

  40. CSPAN has the video of Clinton’s speech in South Carolina today.

    She did steal Obama’s trick of having a plant shout “We love Hillary” at the start.

  41. What hate Hillary crap? I posted where you could find video of her campaign speech today. If you are not interested, don’t go watch it.

  42. Really?! That’s all you were doing hwc? Please! We know what you were doing, and you know that we know what you’re doing. No one is being fooled here. After Obama, we recognize attempts to bamboozle when we see them.

  43. I watched Hillary’s entire speech today. Did you? That makes two full campaign speeches I’ve watched of hers. SC and Iowa so far. Again, if you aren’t interested, don’t go to CSPAN and watch it. Clinton offered one three-point policy plan in today’s speech that I don’t recall hearing in the Iowa speech.

    I don’t think I’ve hidden the fact that I am unlikely to vote for her if she runs as Obama’s third term, but I’m still an undecided voter trying to figure out what all (or nearly all) of the candidates are pitching and how effectively and convincingly they are pitching it.

  44. Obama gives up, will not challenge court ruling.

    http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Obama-Concedes-to-Federal-Court-Immigration-Block-20150527-0038.html

    A U.S. Department of Justice spokesperson announced Wednesday that the Justice Department will not seek a suspension from the Supreme Court over the block on Obama’s immigration action. The announcement follows a Department of Justice evaluation of a ruling Tuesday by a U.S. Court of Appeals to block Obama’s immigration reform aimed at protecting millions of undocumented migrants.

  45. All go today…..

    BREAKING: NEBRASKA ABOLISHES THE DEATH PENALTY

    Nebraska abolished the death penalty Wednesday, overriding a veto by Republican Gov. Pete Ricketts.

  46. Shadowfax
    May 27, 2015 at 3:48 pm
    ————–
    Shadowfax! You forgot your sense of humor. The turds just keep on coming. That is because they are obsessed with their anus. Just like the Obama Progressives. It is all about their anus. They really believe products from there should be treasured by the world.

  47. Moon,
    Can that be true? Obama must have another plan, his handlers would never let him “give up”.

    Got to give it to Coulter…surprised Ramos thought he could “handle her”.

  48. Obola knew he was way off base on his diktat. Recall, this came after the ass whipping the Dems got in the 2014 election and it was about “showing them”. It served the purpose of a distraction and his “open borders” directive from Soros and other banksters. He otherwise probably just does not care.

  49. gonzotx
    May 27, 2015 at 6:42 pm
    __________

    They will argue that the decision is restricted to the fifth circuit, and does not apply to the rest of the country.

    Seems like they tried that before, and it did not work.

    But with Obama, it is never about what works for the country.

    It is always about what is good for him politically.

  50. By appealing to the Supreme Court they feared the would lose and that loss would then become the law of the land.

  51. And this is why they are loathe to seek a review by the Fifth Circuit en banc:
    ————–
    Judicial Watch Statement on Fifth Circuit Court’s Ruling against Obama Administration’s Executive Amnesty

    MAY 27, 2015

    (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the recent Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling which found the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program, President Obama’s executive amnesty, likely will not survive court scrutiny:

    The Fifth Circuit Court’s ruling against President Obama’s executive amnesty, officially known as the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program, is a win for the American people. The federal courts aren’t buying into President Obama’s power grab that rewrites immigration law. It is reassuring to see that the judiciary is still committed, at least in this matter, to abiding by constitutional principles and the rule of law.

    While the Fifth Circuit limited its ruling to the question of granting or denying the request to stay the injunction, one need only read the court’s opinion carefully to see that the broader legal outlook for DAPA, and possibly other executive overreaches on amnesty, is stormy, at best.

    This ruling is a significant win for Judicial Watch supporters who for years have fought the Obama administration’s blatant abuse of immigration law and presidential authority. Judicial Watch filed three amicus curiae briefs in State of Texas, et al. v. United States of America, et al.
    •opposing the administration’s request for an emergency “stay;”
    •opposing the Department of Justice’s attempt to block the ruling that postponed immigration action in the Fifth Circuit;
    •and on behalf of State Legislators for Legal Immigration (SLLI) in support of Texas and 20 other states that sued the federal government to prevent the Obama administration’s implementation of DAPA.

    This victory is important but Americans should know that President Obama’s administration has almost completely stopped deporting illegal aliens and continues to leave our borders open to illegal aliens and terrorists. This lawlessness places the nation’s safety at risk

    Tom Fitton

  52. wbboei
    May 28, 2015 at 12:18 am
    A fitting tribute to Louie Guteriezz and Jorge Ramos in re. their cultural imperialism and dumping . .

    ———–
    Now that is funny, Wbbs.

  53. The best possible argument Ann could make is that Mexico is a failed state. We need to start talking that way, because that focuses attention on their elites who refuse to share the wealth and are dumping their underclass here. They are the real problem.

  54. Well wbb,
    At least we are winning a few squrimishes…

    My hope is we can start winning the war with our own government. ..

  55. The real problem is that these huddled masses walk across our borders illegally. They go into hiding and are breaking our safety nets. Like I have said before, we take care of our poor and homeless first, before we take on everyone else’s problems.

  56. hwc
    May 27, 2015 at 3:33 pm

    She did steal Obama’s trick of having a plant shout “We love Hillary” at the start.
    _________________________________________________________________________________________________

    This crappola is what Free, Shadow and I are talking about. Spare me your Alfred E. Neuman “what me worry” feigned ignorance of what you are doing.

    There are so many anti-Hillary sites you could go to and post this kind of BS and would be praised for its “genius”.

    But at this pro-Hillary site, you have shown yourself to be anti-Hillary, anti-Democrat and frankly anti-civility because only an uncivilized person would continue this nonsense in order to fulfill their small sense of self-worth.

    I would ask you to cease this deliberate antagonism but the very fact that you are doing this at all makes such a request an effort in futility.

    You are not part of the solution for the country, you are part of the problem and rest assured, you are changing NO ONE’s mind regarding their support of Hillary. If anything, you are solidifying.

  57. Obviously out of “the loop”, I sought help. Got little.
    Synonyms for anomalous – adj deviating from normal, usual
    abnormal star
    atypical star
    divergent star
    incongruous star
    peculiar star
    unnatural star
    aberrant star
    bizarre star
    eccentric star
    exceptional star
    foreign star
    heteroclite star
    inconsistent star
    irregular star
    odd star
    preternatural star
    prodigious star
    rare star
    strange star
    unorthodox star
    unrepresentative star
    untypical star
    unusual

  58. Take #2.
    Obviously out of “the loop”, I sought help. Got little.
    Synonyms for anomalous – adj deviating from normal, usual
    abnormal
    atypical
    divergent
    incongruous
    peculiar
    unnatural
    aberrant
    bizarre
    eccentric
    exceptional
    foreign
    heteroclite
    inconsistent
    irregular
    odd
    preternatural
    prodigious
    rare
    strange
    unorthodox
    unrepresentative
    untypical
    unusual

  59. From 2007 onward we’ve argued that a flim-flam man has to stay one step ahead of the law but that eventually the law, grinding ever slowly, grinds on. We also argued that immigration reform is a chess game and a comedy routine that depends greatly on timing. The New York Times finally agrees with us that it’s all in the timing. The timing for Obama is not good:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/us/obama-immigration-executive-action-supreme-court.html?_r=0

    WASHINGTON — President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s immigration system, which he announced in a prime-time speech to the nation last November, may remain under a cloud of legal uncertainty until months before he leaves office in 2017, legal experts and administration officials said Wednesday.

    Officials from the Justice Department said in a statement that they would not ask the Supreme Court for permission to carry out the president’s immigration programs — which seek to provide work permits and deportation protection to millions of undocumented immigrants — while a fight over presidential authority plays out in the lower courts.

    That legal battle may extend for a year or more, officials said, undermining any hope of putting the president’s plan into effect until right before the 2016 election.

    “The timing is critical,” said Stephen H. Legomsky, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. “If the process drags on until the summer of 2016, then implementation becomes very difficult.” [snip]

    The president vowed to act days before Thanksgiving last year, urging undocumented immigrants to “come out of the shadows” and declaring that his actions were “not only lawful, they’re the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican president and every Democratic president for the past half-century.”

    But administration officials on Wednesday said the decision not to ask the Supreme Court to allow the program to move forward immediately reflects a practical reality: Even if the justices had given the green light to begin implementing the program, the continuing legal fight would probably have scared away most of the undocumented immigrants who could apply for it. [snip]

    Administration officials had hoped to begin inviting millions of immigrants to sign up for the president’s new immigration program as early as this month. But that effort has been shelved since February, when a Texas judge ordered a halt, calling it an executive overreach and agreeing that officials had violated administrative procedures.

    On Tuesday, the appeals court refused to overturn that order, saying that it believed Mr. Obama’s lawyers would ultimately lose in their efforts to defend the president’s actions.

    Rather than continue to fight the judge’s initial order, administration officials said Wednesday that government lawyers would wait and make what they believe will be a stronger legal argument on the merits of the president’s immigration program.

    Those oral arguments before the Fifth Circuit are scheduled to begin during the week of July 6, and administration officials expressed confidence that they would eventually prevail.

    If the president were to win at the appeals court later this summer, legal experts said it was possible that Mr. Obama could order the program to begin later this year.

    But administration officials said it was very likely that whoever lost at the appeals court would ask the Supreme Court to consider the full merits of the president’s actions. If the court agrees to hear the case, it would likely hear arguments during its term that begins in October and could issue a ruling the following June.

    That would mean that the legal fate of the president’s immigration program would be decided just as the fall campaign for the 2016 presidential contest gets into full swing.

    If Mr. Obama were to emerge victorious in the court in the summer of 2016, the timing would pose several problems for his immigration programs.

    With only a few months to go before he leaves office, Mr. Obama’s administration would face the daunting task of quickly setting up a new bureaucracy that could process millions of applications from undocumented immigrants. Officials said they believe the administration could do that in a few months, if necessary.

    But even as they would be seeking to get the program up and running, the issue could become a major part of the debate between the two presidential candidates.

    By then, a Republican candidate might be vowing to repeal the president’s executive actions even as a Democratic candidate promises to keep them in place. Several Republican hopefuls have already made such a promise and Hillary Rodham Clinton has said she would expand Mr. Obama’s executive actions if she was elected president.

    That political debate could make undocumented immigrants very nervous about revealing themselves before they knew who the next president was going to be.

    “That might not be something they want to do,” Mr. Legomsky said.

    Obama is going to lose at the lower levels and the Supreme Court too – that is something the New York Times won’t even consider. This then will place Hillary in a very difficult hole she herself dug. Whoever the campaign genius was that suggested her current posture needs to be fired immediately.

  60. Admin: you may find it strange that Obama would:

    1. contend, on multiple occasions that he lacked the power under the Constitution to grant blanket amnesty, but then

    2. contend that, vice previous word, he had that power and would exercise it, since congress has not acted, but then

    3. contend, after losing the case that 3 federal judges who agreed with 1, but not 2, wilfully misinterpreted the laws, but then

    4. announce that he will not appeal their decision, in effect throwing in the towel

    Since the big media beloved messiah is the smartest man ever to set foot in the White House, one of his many defenders would undoubtedly say that consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. To which I would say, whose: his, or theirs?

  61. I find it passing strange that the White House would decry that the 3 federal judges out of 4 (the fourth being a bona fide loon) have intentionally, purposely and willfully misinterpreted the law as it relates to the powers of the president to grant blanket amnesty over the objections of congress, the states and the American people—obv

    More on the length the big media beloved messiah will got to in order to prove to the world that he is not consistent and therefore does not have a small mind . . . just a sociopathic one:
    —————

    Obama 2012: I Ended The War. Obama 2015: Only The USA Patriot Act Can Save Us!
    No Politician Wants A War. All of Them Seem To Want War Powers.

    By: Repair_Man_Jack (Diary) | May 28th, 2015 at 07:00 AM | 7

    President Barack Obama bragged during his 2012 Reelection Campaign that he ended the war in Iraq. GM alive, Bin Laden dead, Barack Obama 2012! Barack Obama was dismissive when told that threats still remained. He initially described ISIS as “the JV.” For all who would listen he loudly proclaimed a victory for peace. Now that Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) 82% is demanding a peace dividend in the form of reduced governmental surveillance authority; the president wants The USA Patriot Act renewed by 12 am next Monday.

    You see, Senator Paul is blocking votes on The USA Freedom Act which would reauthorize the USA Patriot Act in its entirety. He doesn’t sound particularly interested in making a deal, unless he gets majority votes on amendments aimed at gutting certain parts of the aforementioned Patriot Act that he feels jeopardize individual rights that are enumerated in the 4th Amendment to The US Constitution. Paul describes his inner feelings about The Patriot Act below.

    “Five days,” Paul wrote in a Tuesday message to supporters. “That’s how long you and I have until the U.S. Senate meets in a rare Sunday session on May 31st where surveillance state apologists will do everything they can to RAM through an extension of the so-called ‘PATRIOT Act’s’ ILLEGAL and unconstitutional domestic spying programs. I’m not backing down. I’m not going to compromise. I’m going to stand and fight until the very last moment — regardless of the smears and attacks I face,” Paul wrote in the email.

    President Obama suddenly seemed a whole lot less chipper about all the world peace he had ushered in by withdrawing from Iraq. It was almost as if the Arab Spring has raised a bumper crop of mosquitoes and skunk cabbages. The President stressed the urgency of protecting us from all the threats he claimed to have eradicated while seeking his second term in office.

    “I strongly urge the Senate to work through this recess and make sure that they identify a way to get this done. Keep in mind that the most controversial provision in there, which had to do with the gathering of telephone exchanges in a single government database — that has been reformed in the USA Freedom Act. But you have a whole range of authorities that are also embodied in the Patriot Act that are non-controversial, that everybody agrees are necessary to keep us safe and secure. Those also are at risk of lapsing. So this needs to get done. And I would urge folks to just work through whatever issues can still exist, make sure we don’t have, on midnight Sunday night, this task still undone, because it’s necessary to keep the American people safe and secure.”

    Meanwhile, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) 100% has stated that the Senate version of The USA Freedom Act might as well be taken out behind the barn and killed with an ax.

    “Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) 55%’s proposal to plug the so-called ‘holes’ in the USA FREEDOM Act is dead-on-arrival in the House. His bill is not stronger on national security, it is just much weaker on civil liberties. This is nothing more than a last-ditch effort to kill the USA FREEDOM Act, which passed the House 338-88. If the Senate coalesces around this approach, the result will be the expiration of important authorities needed to keep our country safe,” the Wisconsin Republican said in a statement.

    I’m not even entirely sure if Senator Paul is correct in his assessment of The Freedom Act’s problems, but I’m enjoying the fact that The White House is now practically begging the US Senate to protect them from all of their magnificent foreign policy victories. Now Senator Paul should make Barack Obama explain just what these threats are that he needs the USA Freedom Act to save us all from. Let’s hear what ails The Mighty Lightbringer.

  62. On Tuesday, the appeals court refused to overturn that order, saying that it believed Mr. Obama’s lawyers would ultimately lose in their efforts to defend the president’s actions.

    Rather than continue to fight the judge’s initial order, administration officials said Wednesday that government lawyers would wait and make what they believe will be a stronger legal argument on the merits of the president’s immigration program.

    Those oral arguments before the Fifth Circuit are scheduled to begin during the week of July 6, and administration officials expressed confidence that they would eventually prevail.

    If the president were to win at the appeals court later this summer, legal experts said it was possible that Mr. Obama could order the program to begin later this year.
    ——-
    A stronger legal argument?

    One that is not tainted by lying to a federal judge perhaps.

    Other than that, what is that stronger legal argument that leads them to believe that they will prevail?

    More delusion perhaps?

    More Higgenbottoms–what a cerrtifiable loon he is.

    Here is what Judicial Watch said on that subject:

    “While the Fifth Circuit limited its ruling to the question of granting or denying the request to stay the injunction, one need only read the court’s opinion carefully to see that the broader legal outlook for DAPA, and possibly other executive overreaches on amnesty, is stormy, at best.”

  63. Okay fine. Then let us talk about the merits. Yes, there is a difference between giving up on the injunction and giving up on the merits. The mere fact that Obama gave up on the injunction, does leave him free as a bird (a vulture) to argue the merits–FOR WHAT THEY ARE…WORTH!.

    But the contradiction described above between point 1: I do not have the power vs. point 2: is baked into Obama’s position still exists and his compelling, and the court should take cogizance of it, as Judge Hanen did.

    Barack Hussein Obama may be everything big media assures us he is, with awesome powers of levitation, clairvoyance and the ability to turn chicken shit into chicken salad. But in the cannons of messiahs, wizards and sky pilots there is one glaring exception which cuts the other way, hence big media, true to form, has censored it in order to protect their boy–while insisting they are journalists.

    At no time and under no circumstances shall a messiah at the same time be allowed to have his cake and eat it too. That is verbotten. It is a cardinal offense, and just cause for expulsion from the guild of messiahs, similar four flushers. (Canon I. Subpart B.) This is also set forth in the white man made me do it clause in the Race Baiter addendum to same.

  64. The Repugs are gonna need a bigger stage now Pataki has thrown his million to one shot hat into the ring……its rapidly turning into a bun food fight for airtime…

    How many of the losers are going to fight it out come January….

  65. I can think of three or four of the “Republicans” who really should jump over to the Democratic primary race. Kinda like switching to a less crowded highway when your road is bumper to bumper. Give Hillary some chumps to debate against. Get rid of some RINOs from the Republican stage. It’s a win/win. What would Arlen do?

    Kasich and Pataki are obviously getting in because they sense weakness in the “Washington Establishment” bracket as JEB continues with his inauspicious start. I can’t see where nominating a New Yorker would be anything but brain dead for the Republicans. If the Dems nominated Charles Manson from his jail cell to run against Mother Theresa for the GOP, still they’d carry New York handily.

  66. its rapidly turning into a bun food fight for airtime…

    How many of the losers are going to fight it out come January….

    ———–
    I think the primary is more like the GOP non-beauty Pageant, where a lot of the unqualified parade up on stage to see who wins the geezer cockfight for who has the largest delusions of grandeur.

    The Dims normally do this too, why else would we have ended up with HuffNPuff, Kerry, Gore, Richardson, Dodd and Mr. Overpriced Haircuts.

  67. Shadow, we need some of the real loons to get going and chuck their hats in so we can at least get some fun out of this.

  68. Oh please I am dying laughing…….Pot meet the kettle and go on a date.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/herman-cain-criticizes-rick-santorum-2016-bid-118376.html

    Herman Cain mocks Santorum’s ‘doomed presidential bid’

    By Adam B. Lerner

    5/28/15 1:23 PM EDT

    Failed Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain decried former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.) for entering a presidential race he is unlikely to win.

    The former Godfather’s Pizza CEO tweeted about Santorum’s “doomed presidential bid” and lobbed another bomb at ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, mocking Santorum for making his announcement in an interview with the “pretend journalist.”

    “Does he bring anything to the table that hasn’t already been rejected? Nope,” the post said about Santorum. “Has he modified his message to appeal to a country that appears desperate for a true, small government, constitutionalist? Nope. Did he do anything in the years since 2008 that would give you a new reason to vote for him? Nope.”

    “It’s simply a re-run.”

    Cain launched his own long-shot presidential bid in 2012 and, though he surged to the top of the polls for a brief period, his candidacy floundered after he flubbed a question on American intervention in Libya and said in an interview that he was ready for “gotcha” questions like who’s the president of “U-beki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan.” Ultimately, the former businessman failed to win a single primary state.

    “Perhaps they’re making a desperate bid to remind people that they still exist,” the blog post pondered. “It could be that we’re simply watching a giant game of ‘me too’ played by people who are terrified of being ‘left out.’ Maybe it’s that they each have an army of yes men telling them they actually have a prayer of winning, when in reality they’ll just cannibalize each other and steal time from candidates who could genuinely go the distance. Whatever the reason, the GOP is quickly transitioning from its previous status as a party with a ‘deep bench’ to one boasting a litany of antiquated failures who don’t know when to walk away.”

    “I mean, George Pataki? Someone, please, tell these people to knock it off.”

    …………………

    I tell you this is all going to end up in a clown car explosion.

  69. In an era of free media on the internet, it costs nothing (at this stage of the process) to “run for President”. If you can afford a suitcase, a few plane tickets, some hotel rooms, and one aide, you two can have your own “presidential campaign”.

    To me, the surprise is not how many nobodies are jumping into the Republican race, but why aren’t nobodies jumping into the Dem race? The field is so sparse that even Bernie Sanders gets daily media coverage and any old fool would be guaranteed a debate stage slot. I’m particularly surprised that no African American candidates have jumped in. With the current demographics in the Dem Party, they have a built-in advantage. It’s hard to believe that not a single one of these folks wants to be President (or vice president):

    https://cbc-butterfield.house.gov/members

    Very peculiar.

  70. The crowded Republican field is a function of a sea change in the party. Two dominant single issue factions are dead, but haven’t been buried yet — the John McCain single issue war hawks and the Huckabee single issue chrishun coalition fundamentalists. The George W Bush Republican party is being ushered out, but a lot of these old hacks haven’t seen the writing on the wall. It’s a big like Dick Gephardt running year after year after year on the Dem side.

    It’s too early for the polling to sort things out. Nobody but the Washington insiders and the right-wing blogosphere is paying the slightest bit of attention. I bet I’m one of the very few people in the country who have watched two stump speeches from almost all of the candidates.

  71. I am posting something strictly as food for thought. Carly Foroini has been a critic of Hillary, and some of you may choose to disregard whatever she says on any topic solely for that reason. But if you are seriously interested in what Obama has done to create chaos in the middle east, in order to empower Iran, and would like to see an alternative approach then what she has to say on point is instructive:

    https://youtu.be/94Azr7exxPc

  72. Big Media is Concerned About Obama’s Legasssee.

    The world is falling apart. Big media reports on it breathlessly. But, they refuse to see ANY correlation between that chaos and the cloud cuckooland foreign policies of their messiah. And now that history is closing in on all of us, do they worry about the country? Hell no. Like Gloria Gaynor, they know that with their fortunes and Ivy League credentials they will survive. But that is not to say their existence is worry free. With nothing else to worry about, they now obsess over the legacy of the jack ass they installed as president. They care far more about his legacy than the safety security of the American People. Move over Benedict Arnold. You have got company. Actually, a regiment—all those liars who work for big media and hide what is going on from the American People. Of all the misfortunes and tragedies this has wrought however, the greatest of all is the pretend to be journalists.
    ———

    from Legalinsurection:

    America’s foreign policy in the Middle East is falling apart and health insurance premiums are skyrocketing under Obamacare, but the liberal media feels your pain, America.

    As usual, it’s all about Obama.

    Amber Phillips of the Washington Post:

    President Obama’s legacy is increasingly in legal jeopardy

    President Obama’s second-term agenda, it seems, is in the hands of the courts.

    Same-sex marriage. Obamacare. Climate change. And now immigration. And in many cases, there is significant doubt about whether his signature initiatives will stand legal scrutiny.

    The latest blow to Obama’s second-term plans came Tuesday when a federal appeals court in New Orleans denied the administration’s request to move forward with implementing his expanded executive action on immigration to defer deportation for millions of undocumented immigrants.

    That’s funny. He didn’t run on gay marriage. In fact, Obama said in a 2008 interview with pastor Rick Warren that he believed marriage was between a man and a woman.

    He also said that we could keep our healthcare plans and doctors if we liked them.

    Maybe the American people now know he was lying, and maybe his legacy doesn’t matter.

    Maybe this is all about the presidential library.

    John Podhoretz of the New York Post might be onto to something here:

    ISIS rises, the economy falters, and Obama’s legacy falls apart

    Deep into the seventh year of his tenure, Barack Obama is thinking about his post-presidential legacy. We know this because he’s telling us so.

    In an interview this week with The Atlantic about the potential deal with Iran regarding its nuclear program, the president sought to use the fact of his relative youth and his consciousness about how history might judge him to his advantage: “Look, 20 years from now, I’m still going to be around, God willing. If Iran has a nuclear weapon, it’s my name on this. I think it’s fair to say that in addition to our profound national-security interests, I have a personal interest in locking this down.”

    In one sense, this is what we want presidents to worry about. We want them to be restrained by the cautionary examples provided by history and by the fact that history will judge them.

    Read it all here.

    Forgive me if I’m more concerned about America’s legacy than Obama’s.

    Good thing I don’t work for Politico.

  73. If you ever saw The Night of the Generals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2UVxede_Xs

    Then you may recall a scene where a German corporal deserts his company on the eastern front, all of them were subsequently slaughtered, except for him. He wakes up in a hospital and is given the iron cross. Politically, those Nazis needed a hero. So they invented one.

    Nunc pro tunc—then as now:

    ————-
    Here is Larry Johnson’s take:

    That is kind of what Sey Hirsh is saying about the killing of Bin Laden.

    Supposedly, there are three Americans with first hand knowledge of what occurred. And their stories are inconsistent–as can happened. They are even reports of how some are calling others liars.

    But the one thing that seems likely is that this assassination was not quite it was cracked up to be, as an election ploy for the big media beloved Messiah, whom we know was M.I.A. that night–as with Benghazi.

    This is where Sy Hersh has the story right.

    Bin Laden, who is despicable and deserved to die, was a sick, infirm man. It would be one thing if the SEALs fast roped on to the roof of the Bin Laden prison and blew into his room within 30 seconds of hitting the roof. Under that scenario Bin Laden would have been sleepy and disoriented. But, per both Bissonette and O’Neil, the assault went on several minutes before they reached their target.

    Let’s face some hard truths. Bin Laden probably could not even get out of bed. Shooting an unarmed man, no matter how big an asshole, is not the kind of story that makes for a dandy Hollywood film. We need a bad guy going out in a futile blaze of glory.

    But that did not happen.

    You may enjoy the bullshit of Zero Dark Thirty as a form of Hollywood terror porn. But it is a false narrative. And the three gentlemen above–Schmidle, Bissonette and O’Neil–are not telling the full truth either. They executed a physically debilitated man who was guilty of horrific crimes. Fine by me. But just tell the truth. Enough of the heroic myth.

    UPDATE–Thought I would add some more observations about areas of agreement and disagreement between the three accounts. There is definitely something squirrely about Rob O’Neil. Was he one of the shooters? Probably. But he is certainly spinning a tale that does not square with some of the other accounts. He is, in my view, quite naive. He claims insight into what the CIA was doing even though he never served with the CIA. He’s vouching for the CIA analyst portrayed in Zero Dark Thirty and does not realize that he’s being played. Whatever knowledge she had played no role in locating Bin Laden

  74. AN EPIDEMIC OF MURDER — 38 dead so far this month, 111 this year — has gripped Baltimore in the weeks following the Freddie Gray riots, threatening to undo decades of rebirth in the city’s popular downtown — and wipe away tens of millions of tourist dollars. (snip)

    Baltimore police union boss Lt. Gene Ryan said in a statement Thursday that criminals are “taking advantage” of the situation and “feel empowered now.” He said “police are under siege” and afraid of going to jail for “doing their jobs.”

    ———–
    Obama: well, just think how much worse it would be if you did not have me and Holder . . . keeping a lid on things. The solution is simple: more taxpayer money, as in –we burn, we loot, you pay, we vote democrat.

    Speaking of baseball analogies, think of Tinkers to Evers to Chance to the downpayment on the Magnum Mansion.

  75. moononpluto
    May 28, 2015 at 5:34 pm
    ——
    Ah, the wrestling coach takes a fall.

    Some of his land deals should be investigated as well.

    After Gingrich and Livingston scandals the RINOs needed a clean guy to take over the important role of Speaker.

    Hassert was their choice.

    Among rinos, clean is a relative term.

    Less dirty than Obama and big media is deemed clean.

    Even though it is dirty.

    Nevertheless, history records that Hassert did a commendable job—for his donors, and now, to our shock and amazement for himself.

    Yes, yes, a guilty man is innocent until proven guilty.

  76. admin
    May 28, 2015 at 10:41 am
    ————————
    I defer to your vastly superior political acumen. The article paints a messy situation for Hillary if the courts rule in favor of Obola. But if they are unwilling to check this executive over-reach, we are all screwed, anyway. If they do rule against Obola, then Hillary can cop out on her generosity towards illegals and voters will not have to worry about it.

    Games will be played.

  77. Remember the House lawsuit against Obama and the issue of standing? More on executive overreach and the alliance between the legislative and judicial branch:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/r-us-judge-grills-lawyer-defending-obamas-healthcare-law-changes-2015-5

    U.S. judge grills lawyer defending Obama’s healthcare law changes

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A U.S. judge on Thursday blasted the Obama administration’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives over the implementation of the Democratic president’s signature healthcare law.

    Republicans in the House filed a lawsuit in November, saying administration officials unlawfully bypassed Congress.

    At issue are executive changes authorizing Treasury payments to healthcare insurers without the funding being agreed by Congress and delaying implementation of the law’s employer mandate, which required employers with more than 50 employees to provide healthcare coverage.

    U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, appointed by Obama’s predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, repeatedly interrupted U.S. Justice Department lawyer Joel McElvain during the hearing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

    Justice Department lawyers argue that the House lacks standing to sue, citing a section of U.S. law that means the House would have to prove it has been directly harmed.

    “So it is your position that if the House of Representatives affirmatively voted not to fund something … then that vote can be ignored by the administration, because after all, no one can sue them?” she asked.

    McElvain argued that the merits of the case were not being discussed at the hearing, and that any perceived injury was “abstract.”

    “I’m not asking you to give me your brief. I want you to explain … why it’s not an insult to the Constitution?” Collyer said.

    McElvain argued that the House could pass new legislation if it disagreed with the administration’s changes, which he said were legal under “pre-existing permanent appropriation.”

    At another point, Collyer admonished McElvain: “You can’t just shake your head and not deal with the question.”

    The lawsuit is one of a flurry filed against the Obama administration in the past few months challenging executive actions on healthcare and immigration as Republicans seek to amp up pressure on the president.

    Jonathan Turley, a lawyer for the House Republicans, said the lawsuit should go forward to show the power of the purse “should not be decorative.”

    The judge, while appearing sympathetic to the Republicans’ decision to bring the lawsuit, said she had not yet decided on the standing issue before her.

    The case is United States House of Representatives v. Burwell et al, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No 14-1967

    Is another judicial Kraken about to be released, this one is D.C. itself?

  78. Now that Messiah Obama has thrown in the towel on defeating the injunction . . .

    I wonder whether some of our unwanted visitors who have come out of the shadows

    Are looking at their hole card and wondering:

    1. Quien es Senior Barkey Obama?

    Translation: who is that masked man who is always grinning and playing golf and promising us the sun, the moon and the stars?

    2. Es un Hombre Mentiroso!

    Translation: he is a lying scumbag.

    3. No hay digno de confianza!

    Translation: given enough time, he will throw everyone under the bus.

    4. Adios muchachos:

    https://youtu.be/57_9PAowYtw

  79. Lu4PUMA
    May 28, 2015 at 7:37 pm
    About that TPP:

    It’s mostly not about trade. Only 5 of the 29 chapters are about traditional trade.
    ——–
    Exactly what we have been saying, to those who try to tell us this is business as usual.

    No wonder they are keen to keep it secret.

  80. They come here in violation of our laws to claim our jobs and our saftey nets because:

    1. there are thousands of American companies eager to give them jobs

    2. there are millions of Americans (like you) who benefit

    Oh my god.

    These are saints.

    They are not doing this for themselves.

    They are breaking our laws, taking our jobs, and undermining our country–for us.

    Now that Jorge Ramos has cleared that one up, it behooves us to just shut the fuck up.

    Which would make the elites happy.

  81. Jorge has the same problem as obama.

    When he goes off the teleprompter his mouth overloads his ass.

  82. Question: “What’s a terror attack or two if you can bring thousands of new voters who’ll support the Democratic Party? Isn’t that what foreign policy and immigration are really all about?”

    P.S. Well, that’s a prog for you.

    There is no ambiguity in their position.

    Party over country.

    Ditto big media.

    ———–

    On Wednesday, PJ Media’s Patrick Poole wrote a breakthrough report about the shocking rise in domestic terror arrests this year. As he explained, 40 (wannabe) terrorists have been arrested in the first five months of 2015 alone.

    Later in the day, Poole had to update that to 41 as news broke of the arrest of Asher Abid Khan.

    How steep has the rise in terror activity been this year? Writes Poole:

    At the current pace, by the end of June — halfway through 2015 — the number of cases will exceed the number from the past two years combined (48).

    The single best conservative talker in America — I’m talking about Mark Levin, of course — read Patrick’s article on the air Wednesday evening, explaining that these numbers prove the U.S. has a growing extremism problem. There are increasingly more Muslim extremists in the country, and they’re more than willing to put their hate-filled ideas into practice. That’s bad, but it gets even worse. Levin:

    Forty — and we’re not even at the half-year mark. Forty. And it’s actually worse. Because Obama wants to bring individuals from the Middle East into this country by the tens of thousands, and he’s being urged to do so by his party.

    Levin then mentioned a report from the Washington Free Beacon saying that at least 638 supposed “asylum seekers” from the Middle East have been found to have ties to terror groups. Yes, you read that right: 638 so-called refugees who tried to get into America were likely terrorists. And these were just the ones who got caught.

    Any sane government would be so shocked by these facts that it would limit the amount of asylum-seekers it lets into the country, but regrettably, the Obama administration is crazy. These radical leftists literally play with American lives, and they couldn’t care less.

    What’s a terror attack or two if you can bring thousands of new voters who’ll support the Democratic Party? Isn’t that what foreign policy and immigration are really all about?

    Read more: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/05/28/quoting-pjm-mark-levin-slams-obama-for-ignoring-shocking-rise-in-u-s-terror-arrests/#ixzz3bUhuLpsj

    ————–

    Read more: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/05/28/quoting-pjm-mark-levin-slams-obama-for-ignoring-shocking-rise-in-u-s-terror-arrests/#ixzz3bUgDzkmU

  83. Admin: The whole point of this amnesty business is to Cloward-Piven the electoral system and flood the nation with illegals from Mexico and elsewhere under the false flag of “compassion” while de facto legalizing those who are already here, thus affording the Democrats even more shock troops in their war on the nation as founded.
    —————–
    President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s immigration system, which he announced in a prime-time speech to the nation last November, may remain under a cloud of legal uncertainty until months before he leaves office in 2017, legal experts and administration officials said Wednesday.

    Officials from the Justice Department said in a statement that they would not ask the Supreme Court for permission to carry out the president’s immigration programs — which seek to provide work permits and deportation protection to millions of undocumented immigrants — while a fight over presidential authority plays out in the lower courts. That legal battle may extend for a year or more, officials said, undermining any hope of putting the president’s plan into effect until right before the 2016 election.

    Well, the whole point of the plan is to Cloward-Piven the electoral system and flood the nation with illegals from Mexico and elsewhere under the false flag of “compassion” while de facto legalizing those who are already here, thus affording the Democrats even more shock troops in their war on the nation as founded.

    “The timing is critical,” said Stephen H. Legomsky, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. “If the process drags on until the summer of 2016, then implementation becomes very difficult.” The inability to quickly put into effect the president’s reforms is another severe blow to Hispanic activists, who had successfully lobbied Mr. Obama to take bold executive action in the face of Republican opposition to comprehensive changes in immigration law.

    In a statement, officials from the Justice Department said they disagreed with a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that continues to block the president’s immigration actions. But they said the government will fight on the merits of the program, rather than push for permission to carry it out immediately.

    “The department believes the best way to achieve this goal is to focus on the ongoing appeal on the merits of the preliminary injunction itself,” said Patrick Rodenbush, a spokesman for the Justice Department.

    Somehow I doubt this will be the last Obama action “under a cloud of legal uncertainty” before this wretched administration ends. Meanwhile, let’s hope the lower courts stick to their guns.

    Read more: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/05/28/obamas-lawless-immigration-overhaul-in-legal-limbo/#ixzz3bUlkDwiG

  84. Clinton is nuts tweeting that the 5th Circuit Court is wrong on immigration. ..and then to leave no doubt,she states that she will continue the fight..
    Burrrr…
    5/28 hwc 1221

  85. I had such a big laugh today when I heard that Santorum announced he was running for president. He must live in a bubble.

    I read somewhere today that the republican people are saying they not with the socially conservative views so much anymore, and that the politicians aren’t hearing them. I would say that Huckabee and Santorum fall in that category.

  86. gonzotx

    May 29, 2015 at 1:16 am

    Clinton is nuts tweeting that the 5th Circuit Court is wrong on immigration. ..and then to leave no doubt,she states that she will continue the fight..
    Burrrr…
    5/28 hwc 1221
    ___________________________________________________________________________

    That’s a no-go. Period. Enough of this leftist crap.

  87. Here is a prime example of big media in action.

    I swear to God, this is NOT an isolated case.

    The more headlines you read, the more you realize it is either the (new) rule, or else the exception that swallows it.

    I first saw it to this degree during the 2008 campaign.

    Now, after eight years of a serial liar in the White House it is simply business as usual.

    IF the American People had the ability to distinguish between what is false and what it is true

    It would not be the death of a nation

    But history has shown that roughly half of them are gullible rubes

    And the record of the past eight years speaks for itself

    For our own sanity and that of this nation, we must proceed on the assumption

    That not just some things, but everything they say is to one degree or another a lie

    And what they cover up is the slow selling out of your future and mine.

    Here is a perfect example of what is now pervasive in big media–courtesy of Caleb Howe:

    ———

    Ted Cruz Says You’ll Be Forced To Get Gay Married, Claims Houston Chronicle
    Yeah, or totally not that.

    The Houston Chronicle’s Dylan Baddour has a huge scoop about a crazy conspiracy theory from a stupid Republican who is afraid of gays. Huge, if true. Ohhhhh, so close. Here is the laughable scoop:

    U.S. Sen. from Texas and presidential candidate Ted Cruz apparently believes that efforts to let same-sex couples marry in the United States would force him to wed a man.

    Yes, that’s how the story begins. What a crazy, wingnutty thing to say, right? It’s even worse than Sarah Palin’s ridiculous claim that she could see Russia from her house. Only, wait – Sarah Palin never said that.

    And neither did Ted Cruz.

    But before we get to that, a bit more of Baddour’s breathless reporting, if for no other reason than our own shared amusement. Here, in the form of a screenshot, in case Baddour figures things out and deletes it, is the amazing reporting:

    Now, here is what actually happened. Ted Cruz was indeed doing a radio interview. They were, in fact, talking about gay marriage – specifically, Indiana’s RFRA. Senator Cruz used the phrase “mandatory gay marriage” to describe the government forcing states to accept, recognize, and honor gay marriages, as opposed to leaving it as a state issue. That is the bit that Baddour latched onto to make the claim that Ted Cruz believes the gubmint is going to step in and make him get a husband. Seriously. That’s what he thought.

    Talk about conspiracy theories. The left is so invested in their fiction that opposition to gay marriage is rooted in insane ignorance that they themselves believe insane, ridiculous things. Even the barest examination of Cruz’s interview would have made this easily clear for Baddour. But since when does the mainstream media let examination get in the way of outrage?

    UPDATE: The Houston Chronicle changed the post after Truth Revolt’s article was published. The new version does not mention that it was changed. Here is a screenshot comparing the original wording of the opening paragraph with the new wording.

    :

  88. Do any of Big Pink’s attorneys know whether the issue of “standing ” of a group of legislators – either in on the state level in a suit against governor or federal level as in the current situation – has been ruled upon in the past?

  89. And, by the way, when we encounter headlines that are this partisan, and which, to our eye, do not pass the red face test, we must not afford to the writer of such drivel the presumption of innocence. If I were to have any criticism of those on the right, it is that we try to find some innocent explanation for their treachery, rather than confronting the problem head on, and calling a spade a spade. Figuratively speaking we are in a kill or be killed situation, and it is a fool’s errand to assume you can have anything remotely resembling a civil and informative discussion with these people. If you believe you can do that, then you will be at a loss to explain why when you have a winning hand, they ignore the issue, and begin attacking you. This new phenomenon has been noted by a number of writers, the most recent one being Kirsten Powers, who have identified the war of the left on free speech. It begins with sensitivity bullshit, which begets speech codes, which begets shout downs, which begets riots, which begets cop killings which begets an astronomical rise in the homicide rate in the inner city, the most recent example being of course Baltimore. And every single step of the way who do we find fanning the flames, and inciting this attack on civilization? Why big media of course.

  90. freespirit
    May 29, 2015 at 10:06 am
    ——–
    Here is Tea Party attorney Cleta Mitchell’s take on the question of legislative standing from a WSJ article two weeks ago:

    “Congressional oversight has devolved into a series of show hearings after which nothing happens. No one gets fired for lying. No changes are made in the functioning of the agencies. No programs are defunded. Congress issues subpoenas that are ignored, contempt citations that aren’t enforced, criminal referrals that go into Justice Department wastebaskets.

    If it is to function as a coequal branch of government, Congress should establish—either through the rules of each House, or by legislation, that it has STANDING to independently enforce a congressional subpoena through the federal courts. Congress also should use its purse strings to change specific behavior in federal agencies. Rather than across-the-board reductions, Congress should zero out specific departments and programs as agency misconduct is uncovered. It is the only way to stop the executive branch from running roughshod over the American people.

    This will be a difficult challenge as long as partisans in both houses of Congress see their role as political gatekeepers who must protect executive agencies when a president of their own party is in the White House. Congressional Democrats have done all in their power to thwart the IRS investigation, arguing with Republicans at hearings and engaging behind-the-scenes with the IRS to undermine the inquiry.

    Yet it is a challenge that cannot be shirked. Congress needs to relearn how to flex serious legislative muscle to guard against future executive abuses like those from the IRS.”

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-congress-botched-the-irs-probe-1431645154

  91. If the Houston Chronicle does not fire this son of a bitch, then they are endorsing his lie. And the effect of that lie is to poison the well—which is what this writer is aiming for. If the Houston Chronicle allows this kind of a totalitarian to march under its mast head, then they are not journalists. I say that half in jest however, because if you read their editorial page it is clear enough what they are.

  92. Thanks, wbb.

    This phrase from Mitchell perfectly describes the political climate:

    …. partisans in both houses of Congress see their role as political gatekeepers who must protect executive agencies when a president of their own party is in the White House.

    Rabid partisanship – placing party advantage above the nation’s best interest – is the source of most of the dysfunction in our government.

  93. If I was 25 years old and had sat through four years at Cornell, I could easily have done what “Adam B. Lerner” did and write a headline — a headline that would have set the sitemeter racing — that said “Obama Says He Is First Jewish President.”

    In fact, that headline would be more accurate and require much less cutting and pasting that Lerner’s lede paragraph.

    If I used Lerner’s standard I could blog myself into a stupor each day inventing things Democrats didn’t say.

    Why didn’t I? Because, unlike Lerner and unlike Politico, I don’t find it necessary to make up stuff.

    IF YOU CAN READ THE ANTICS OF THIS ADMINISTRATION, AND NOT BE OUTRAGED, THEN YOU ARE COMATOSE!!! (Emphasis added.)

    Because, unlike Lerner and unlike Politico, I don’t reprint advocacy emails under my byline… and if I use them, I attribute the source.

    Because, unlike Lerner and unlike Politico, I have a sense of shame my parent instilled in me that tells me lying about people, even people you detest, is wrong.

    Because, unlike Lerner and unlike Politico, I believe there is a threshold of decency that shouldn’t be crossed even in the service of attaining your political objectives.

    http://www.redstate.com/2015/05/29/honest-less-biased-politico/

  94. Wbb

    1. Quien es Senior Barkey Obama?

    Translation: who is that masked man who is always grinning and playing golf and promising us the sun, the moon and the stars?

    ——–

    You should be the chief translator for the Obama administration…

  95. wbboei
    May 28, 2015 at 9:44 pm

    Lu4PUMA
    May 28, 2015 at 7:37 pm
    About that TPP:

    ——-
    How darn crappy is it that American citizens have to rely on Snowden, Wikileaks and similar whistle blowers to tell us the truth about what the Obama government is doing to take away our fought for freedoms and jack up our Constitution.

  96. admin
    May 27, 2015 at 2:21 pm

    —-

    admin, could you please turn off the automatic play on this video??????

    Thank you.

  97. I don’t know whether this is a significant issue to anyone here – just posting as informational. Political blog, Quinn’s Commentary, encouraging support of term limits – promised back in 1994 by as part of the Contract with America of which Newt the Reptile was an architect. Of course, at the end of the promised two terms, many of the Republicans failed to honor their “contracts””, and ran for third terms.

    The author is right in arguing that the longer our elected officials are in office the more power they have. The more power they have, the greater their opportunity to abuse it. While many people agree on that point, the truth is that the long-termers who remain in office term after term are able get more funding for projects in their individual states. Consequently, voters are reluctant to vote them out. It becomes a self-perpetuating process and the voters, obviously, enable it. They may want voters in other states to kick their Senators or Representatives out after two or three terms, but they want to keep their own in office to keep those dollars coming in. The concept of “greater good” does not apply.

    http://quinnscommentary.com/2015/05/28/term-limits-please-%F0%9F%98-what-you-can-do-%96%F0%9F%91/

  98. As usual, big media is trying to pick the most pathetic and beatable republican candidate to be the nominee.

    That is why they talk incessantly about Jeb-id-ay-ahhh.

    My cat could beat Jeb in a debate–and I don’t even have a cat.

    But if you drill down on the polling, past the top line, and apply a little common sense it becomes obvious that it is just another lie.

    They are good at that, and it comes from having had so much practice.
    —-

    Where It Counts: Huck, Cruz, Walker Lead
    By DICK MORRIS
    Published on DickMorris.com on May 29, 2015

    The conventional wisdom shows Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul competing strongly for the Republican presidential nomination. But a close analysis of the latest Quinnipiac Poll indicates that with strong elements of the Party’s right wing, they perform poorly in comparison to Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker and, for now, Ben Carson.

    Among all Republican voters, the poll shows Bush, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, and Carson are all tied at 10% each while Paul lags at 7% and Cruz at 6%.

    But an analysis of the three key conservative groups that drive the nominating process tells a different story:

    Very Conservative

    Carson 14%
    Huckabee 13%
    Walker 12%
    Cruz 11%
    Bush 8%
    Rubio 8%
    Paul 8%

    Tea Party

    Cruz 17%
    Walker 13%
    Rubio 12%
    Carson 12%
    Huckabee 10%
    Paul 9%
    Bush 6%

    Evangelicals

    Huckabee 17%
    Cruz 10%
    Bush 9%
    Walker 8%
    Paul 8%
    Carson 8%
    Rubio 6%

    The Tea Party and the Evangelicals are the two most important groups in a Republican primary.

    Cruz dominates the Tea Party field and does well among Evangelicals. Huckabee dominates the Evangelical voter base and does well among Tea Party voters. Walker scores well among the Tea Party crowd but does poorly with Evangelicals.

    By contrast, neither Paul nor Rubio trigger much enthusiasm in either group and do poorly among very conservative voters. Their poor showing among these key groups would seem to indicate that they might find it difficult to motivate their voters.

    For Jeb Bush, his tepid showing with Evangelicals and Tea Party backers may not be lethal. His prestige and money will likely even the odds down the road.

    The poll begs the question of whether Ben Carson’s support is real. Coming in with the top tier among all primary voters and first among very conservative Republicans, indicates a great deal of latent power. Whether he can sustain that is another question. How much of his support is biographic reflecting his celebrity status as a role model/doctor? Can he transfer it to a political context?

    We will see, but the poor showing of Rubio and Paul and the strong appeal to staunch conservatives of Huckabee, Cruz, and Walker is the real story of this early date in the contest.

  99. CANDIDATE . . . .C . . .TP . .. E. . .TTL

    Huckster: 13 + 10 + 17 = 40

    Cruz: 11 + 17 + 10 = 38

    Carson: 14 + 12 + 8 = 34

    Walker: 12 + 13 + 8 = 33

    *Rube-eo: 8 + 12 + 6 = 26

    *Paul: 8 + 9 + 8 = 25

    *Booosh: 8 + 6 + 9 = 23

    ——
    * The three (3) front runners, according to big media.

  100. Lu4PUMA
    May 29, 2015 at 9:22 pm

    First quarter GDP estimates MINUS 0.7% and that is doubly seasonally adjusted. Can we say FAIL? They are blaming exports/imports. Do you smell the dirty Obamatrade deal coming?
    —–
    Only if we know what is in the 24 chapters that have nothing to do with trade.

    Actually, this comes at a pretty good time.

    Try as they might the details will leak out.

    Both parties are looking at the 2016 election.

    Neither can afford to be seen as disenfranchising the voters.

    A bad time would be January 22, 2017.

    Let me just say what I think this is about.

    Obama is retreating from the world.

    And China is quickly filling the vacuum.

    And trade follows the flag.

    The big impetus for the Iran deal is coming from Imelt.

    He wants to sell nuclear reactors there.

    It is the same with other countrie.

    I am told by an Iranian friend that despite embargos

    American companies are doing business in that venue

    Through other nations–who act as middle men.

    What Obama is doing is retreating everywhere—

    Even at our own borders we are giving up

    The concern by American Companies is that they will lose markets to China

    In order to compete with China, they must have slave wages.

    Those companies give them that, plus markets.

    That is the whole deal here.

    And what do the middle class get out of this arrangement?

    What the little boy shot at and hit–no a damned thing.

  101. What me worry?

    The worst first quarter of any president in history.

    One more feather in his cap.

    One more first in his legacy.

    Here we see him relaxing on his 70th vacation.

    Swimming outside the Hawaiian Mansion financed by his pay to play donors.

    Where is that Great White shark when we need him?

    Yes, I know, he is busy with another script and we will have to talk to his agent etc.

    http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/blame-it-global-cooling-obama-has-lowest-average-1stq-gdp-growth-any

  102. Several police shootings have occurred which require due process investigation.

    Unfortunately, Messiah Obama has chosen to politicize them, repeatedly before the facts were in.

    And big media has engaged in shameless race baiting, rather that waiting for a verdict.

    Not surprisingly, the mob has rioted in various cities across the country.

    And a number of cops have been killed.

    While other cops have been offered up to the mob by politicians.

    This state of affairs presents a decision tree for the cops:

    1. door 1: a shiv in the gut from a thug

    2. door 2: a shiv in the back from Obama, Holder and Sharpie (Bonfire of the Vanities)

    3. door 3: withdraw from enforcing the law, and proactive policing.

    For some inexplicable reason, the cops across America are choosing door 3.

    Can’t say as I blame them.

    ———–

    The president of the United States seems to believe that the greatest danger facing black Americans is that of being mistreated by police officers.

    Conditions in Baltimore suggest otherwise. Since April 12, the day Freddie Gray was arrested, 51 people have been killed in Baltimore, 47 of whom have been black and none of whom died at the hands of a police officer.

    And it’s not just Baltimore. Cops all over the country have seen the six Baltimore police officers served up to appease the mob, and they know it could happen to them. The results are as predictable as they are tragic.

    In New York City murders are up 12 percent from a year ago as officers continue their reticence at conducting the type of proactive police work that keeps violent crime in check.

    In Los Angeles, homicides are down by 10 percent this year, though this is more of a testament to the skill of paramedics and medical personnel than it is to good police work. Shootings in the city are up by 23 percent and other violent crime is up by 25 percent.

    LAPD arrests for violent crime this year are down by 13 percent. And in some parts of L.A. the picture is bleaker than in others. Shooting incidents are up significantly across heavily black and Latino South-Central L.A. In Newton Division, for example, one of the city’s 21 patrol areas, homicides are up by 42 percent, and the number of shooting incidents and shooting victims have both doubled from last year. Newton Division was the scene of last year’s police killing of Ezell Ford, an “unarmed black man” who, according to the officers who shot him, tried to disarm one them after a foot chase.

    The involved officers, despite the lack of evidence that they did anything illegal or against policy, remain off the streets and under investigation.

  103. This breakdown in the rule of law on the street mirrors the breakdown of law on our borders which mirrors the breakdown of law at the Constitutional level, but big media chooses to hide these facts from the American People, and that is why Obama’s job approval rating sits as 47%, as oppose to the 25% which Bush encountered when he made decisions which were bad, but far less consequential than what Obama has done. The difference is big media loathed Bush and they love Obama. There is too much water under the bridge for them to deny it. They may be feeling the seven year itch right now, when he spies on them, but trust me, it will pass. These are fundamentally dishonest people, therefore any hope for redemption is in vain.

  104. This is an interesting exchange between Pam Geller and a typical CNN airhead.

    The airhead seeks to enforce one of the central taboos of the elites, who have lost faith in western civilization, seek to bring down Christianity and elevate the Muslim religion. The idea that there should be PRIOR RESTRAINTS ON FREE SPEECH which offends Muslims. And any condemnation of Jihadists must include a disclaimer that it does not apply to Muslims as a whole—even the 25% of them who support Sharia Law. And that the slaughter of Christians by Jihadists is a non event, because like all contrary facts, it undermines the leftist narrative.

    Most people would agree that the Middle East is now in chaos, violence is out of control, millions of refugees are looking to get out, and Europe is not sinking their boats, while big media in this country does its level best to hide the truth nd give us their usual bread and circuses–and Obama love. They would rather throw our constitution and our country on a funeral pire, than admit that they are wrong–and that their cloud cuckooland concept of foreign policy is the proximate cause of the problem. They ask whether invading Iraq was a mistake, then the question they should be asking is, having invaded Iraq, and having stabilized the situation through the surge prior to the installation of Obama, was it wise for Obama and his fellow travelers to abandon Iraq against the advice of his generals, and when he labelled ISIS a junior varsity squad, did he not show himself to be the clueless bastard we always knew he was.

    Watch:

    https://youtu.be/SrRINFCCoek

  105. Prior restraint is often considered a particularly oppressive form of censorship in Anglo-American jurisprudence because it prevents the restricted material from being heard or distributed at all.[3]:318 Other forms of restrictions on expression (such as actions for libel or criminal libel, slander, defamation, and contempt of court) implement criminal or civil sanctions only after the offending material has been published. While such sanctions might lead to a chilling effect, legal commentators argue that at least such actions do not directly impoverish the marketplace of ideas.[3]:319 Prior restraint, on the other hand, takes an idea or material completely out of the marketplace. Thus it is often considered to be the most extreme form of censorship.[3]:319 The United States Supreme Court expressed this view in Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart by noting:

    The thread running through all these cases is that prior restraints on speech and publication are the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights. A criminal penalty or a judgment in a defamation case is subject to the whole panoply of protections afforded by deferring the impact of the judgment until all avenues of appellate review have been exhausted. Only after judgment has become final, correct or otherwise, does the law’s sanction become fully operative.

    A prior restraint, by contrast and by definition, has an immediate and irreversible sanction. If it can be said that a threat of criminal or civil sanctions after publication ‘chills’ speech, prior restraint ‘freezes’ it at least for the time.

    Also, most of the early struggles for freedom of the press were against forms of prior restraint. Thus prior restraint came to be looked upon with a particular horror, and Anglo-American courts became particularly unwilling to approve it, when they might approve other forms of press restriction.

  106. The elites, the media and many young bloggers would gladly impose prior restraints, not upon themselves, but upon views they disagree with, and the putative threat of violence is simply a pretext for them to do what they are predisposed to do. This is another branch of the leftist doctrine of silencing their opposition, when they cannot win the argument on the merits.

  107. The Trans Pacific Partnership is a Corporate takeover bid, for sure. It is not just going to diminish the standards of living in this country. But it is also going to fail, just like all the fundamentally flawed practices of the global locusts. The Global Economy is failing. The problem is that our world leaders look to suck the wealth and power out of the masses instead of establishing a functional economic system. They simply have not done their job and should all be fired.

    We clearly have a financial system that seeks to acquire wealth instead of making the wheels turn that produce it. They think they can replicate the effect without performing the process that includes productive activities for the masses that they get paid a fair wage for. JOBS!

    What most people do not get is that China’s economy incorporated all the worst of what has killed our economy. They think they can make it work because they have a dictator who can command certain actions. That is the rational behind the POTUS executive power grab. See how well that works when you have a fuctard in charge. There are not enough advisers in the world to fix that kind of stupid.

    China is in the stock market investment phase of collapse. The government is reducing interest rates so people can go gamble. Some say they have years to go before they are ZIRP, but the system is way more ponzied and unstable than the US. Who knows?

    It is all about putting more in to their fail system to make it work. Somehow we need to find a way to tell them NO. I used to fear a crash. Now, not if that is what it take to stop these locusts.

  108. India is supposed to be the debt virgin that the locusts are flying to next.

    ‘India will probably report on Friday that it’s the world’s fastest growing major economy. Yet unused coal piling up at power plants across the country tells a different story.’

    ‘Plants monitored by the power ministry had an average stock of 20 days as of 24 May, compared with 12 days last year. Gross domestic product (GDP) expanded 7.3% in January to March, slightly down from the prior quarter but faster than China’s 7% growth, according to the median of 28 economist estimates in a Bloomberg News survey. The power numbers, along with subdued lending and slower consumer sales, signal Asia’s third-largest economy may not be firing on all cylinders.’

    “A lot of new generation capacity has come up and still the coal is lying unused,” said Salil Garg, a New Delhi-based director at India Ratings and Research, the local unit of Fitch. “That’s because of lack of industrial activity and financial problems of distribution companies.”

    ‘Part of the power problem is that state electricity distributors are so burdened with debt that they’re unable to pay for as much electricity as their customers need. That explains how a state like Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous, has a power deficit of 11.5% even as coal piles up, according to power ministry data. The province witnesses outages of up to 6-8 hours daily during summer months.’

    “Capacity utilization remains low in several sectors,” said Anubhuti Sahay, an economist at Standard Chartered Plc in Mumbai. “Leverage is also very high and the banking sector is not in a very good position to go and fund higher investment.”

    ‘India is operating with a negative output gap, according to Moody’s Analytics. While growth is seen slowing from 7.5% in October-December, the economy should’ve expanded 9% if it were operating at full capacity, economist Faraz Syed wrote in a report on Wednesday. “We think the new data are dubious,” he wrote. “The revised growth rates don’t align well with partial indicators of demand.”

    http://www.livemint.com/Industry/72tspnhz4HiWlb3VakLLcO/Mounting-coal-piles-add-to-doubts-on-India-growth-passing-Ch.html

    It’s the Global Economy and the Age of Fake, stupid.

  109. wbboei
    May 30, 2015 at 10:50 am

    This is an interesting exchange between Pam Geller and a typical CNN airhead.
    ———————
    Geller is a bulldog. Stays on target, takes no shit and ends with a smile.

Comments are closed.