Liberals Are Always Victims, Just Ask Obama’s Family
Sep 20, 2010 Political
Looks like Obama’s aunt Zeituni, who was in America illegally until Obama was elected, is now the victim in all this mess. Aunt Zeituni has had many excuses for why she was here illegally and they all boil down to, she broke the law. She should have been deported long ago and if she was not related to Barack Obama she would have been sent home. Coincidences are fairly rare so it is highly likely that he or someone in his administration had something to do with her being allowed to stay.
In any event, Zeituni says that if a person comes here as an immigrant we have an obligation to make that person a citizen. In true Obama victim style, Zeituni is convinced that she was the victim in all this and that this great nation had an obligation to make her a citizen.
No lady, we had no such obligation. Becoming an American citizen is a privilege not a right so don’t play that liberal “I have the right to…” twaddle because it will not fly.
You, woman, had an obligation to take your sorry butt home after your legal time here had expired. You had an obligation to report back to court and you had an obligation to leave once you were told to do so.
We have no obligation to you or any other person who comes here as our guest and breaks the law (or comes here as the result of breaking the law). The only obligation we have is to the Constitution and the rule of law and that obligation includes throwing you out of our country.
So shut your mouth and enjoy the special favor you have been given by your nephew. But don’t play the victim card because you are not a victim, you are a criminal.
The article says that Zeituni claims the system made her a victim because it took care of her even though she was illegal. I don’t think the system took advantage of her or made her a victim just because it took care of her. That does not make her a victim, it makes her the recipient of kindness. But she is right, we should have refused to care for her and instead shipped her back home.
Typical liberal POS.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Do You Want These People In Office?
Aug 20, 2010 Political
Two candidates for Congress have decided to go on a hunger strike because the Republican (Duncan Hunter) who they will face will not debate them until October. Ray Lutz and Mike Benoit, the Democrat and Libertarian candidates respectively, decided to wage this strike because they are not getting what they want.
“The hunger has almost disappeared except when there’s food around and TV ads and stuff. The Hometown Buffet commercial is one of the worst. They are an all-you-can-eat buffet,” said Mike Benoit, the libertarian candidate in the three-way race.
The strike started with Democrat Ray Lutz, who said he got the idea from former California Rep. Jim Bates. Benoit immediately joined in. The pair are on their fifth day of a hunger strike they started at sundown on Aug. 12. Politico
One candidate needed an enema and has lost a good bit of weight.
Are these the kind of people we want running the country? Hunger strikes are for wackos who have some cause they want to push. Not being allowed to debate until October is not worthy of a hunger strike and calls the sanity of the candidates into question.
Lutz has at least a bit of sanity as he has decided that he will end his hunger strike on 20 August. He decided that the debate was not worth dying for.
So why do it in the first place? Does the hunger strike hurt Hunter? If these wackos were serious about the strike he could just wait until they drop dead of starvation and he would have no opposition.
These people remind me of children who hold their breath or throw tantrums when they do not get their way.
Interestingly, Lutz has a job that might help him out:
Lutz is an electrical engineer who owns Cognisys, a company that sells electronics to psychologists and other professionals to help treat mental illnesses.
He could probably use some of that shock therapy…
There is absolutely no way these two should be elected to office.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: benoit, hunger strike, hunter, lutz, morons
Deval Patrick Got The Memo, But Late
May 25, 2010 Political
The liberals in this country are not that hard to figure out. They are like colonizing insects that take orders from one entity and then carry the same message around. The MSM, the liberal politicians and the liberal base all get talking points from the White House and then they all use the same words like the good little drones they are.
On any given day we can hear the same unique words coming from nearly every liberal media outlet (Limbaugh sometimes compiles montages of these people all saying the same thing around the very same time) and liberal politicians chime in when they all use carefully crafted phrases to present a false picture or mislead the public.
Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts (and Obama buddy) received the memo on new words to use when referring to Republicans. That word is sedition and it was first used a few weeks ago by Joe Klein (a supposed journalist) who accused Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin of sedition and then agreed when Rush Limbaugh’s name was added to the list.
Of course, nothing that any of these people have said or done in any way, shape, or form fits the definition of sedition and this is true of the incorrect definition Klein scrawled on his martini napkin. The definition of sedition is; “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”
This definition is the dictionary definition and not the one contained in the United States Code. The USC calls the crime of Seditious conspiracy and defines it as such:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. Cornell Law
One will notice that this requires more than words that would incite. You see, the United States has a history of using sedition laws to regulate speech and has done that on 24 different occasions. The Supreme Court ruled that criticism of the government could not be suppressed and “The First Amendment permits punishment of seditious utterances only if they expressly advocate immediate unlawful action and are likely to produce such action imminently (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)).” (1)
Klein’s assertions carry no water but they do not have to. The whole purpose of characterizing what those people say as sedition is to regulate their free speech. This is where Deval Patrick comes in. He recently said that opposition to Barack Obama borders on sedition. I seriously doubt this dim bulb knew the word sedition until he got his marching orders and it is obvious now that he knows the word he does not know what it means.
Opposing what any politician wants CANNOT be seditious. Sedition is an act against a country and the authority of government, not an individual. It is important to keep that point in mind, sedition is an ACT. It requires an act of force. 18 USC (cited above) requires some kind of force to meet the definition of sedition and the definition describes this force used against government, not an individual.
So, it is impossible to be seditious to an individual. As with Klein though, this is not important to those who are working to paint a picture of people planning to use force to overthrow government. This is not the case and even if people were talking about it there would have to be an imminent threat before it could be considered seditious. The purpose of this entire exercise though, is to paint a picture for when the government decides to use sedition as an excuse to stifle the First Amendment rights of those who disagree with the Obama regime and what it is doing to destroy the country.
Patrick was challenged on his assertion and he claimed that it was rhetorical flourish. Once someone explained the definition to him he had a change of heart. But let us be clear. Sedition is not the kind of accusation a person makes as rhetorical flourish. No, sedition is a serious charge especially since our government has used the charge as a way to silence opposition.
This is what the left wants to do. The liberals figure that if they can keep pushing the charge of sedition then perhaps it will be time to silence the dissent as the government has done in the past. The echo chamber of the left will begin to echo the word sedition and many liberal nitwits who do not know the word will be repeating it. This is how the left learns vocabulary. If it were not for the 2000 election most liberals would not know what disenfranchise means. But I digress.
It is not sedition to speak out against government so do not let morons like Klein and Patrick tell you otherwise. They do not know what they are talking about. It is also important to note that anyone who swore to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic cannot be seditious in doing so. Since our government gets its authority from those governed (us) we cannot be seditious if upholding the Constitution, the document by which we give that authority, no matter what it takes to do so.
The government in this country is We the People and the politicians are forcing their will upon us and changing our nation. They are ignoring our Constitution and forcing us (using FORCE) to get us to comply.
Now look at the definition of sedition and tell me who is being seditious.
But this pattern will continue as the echo chamber of the left continues to parrot the talking points sent out by the propagandist in Chief in the White House.
As for Barack Obama. He wants to fundamentally transform this nation and that transformation looks like his intention is to “to destroy by force the Government of the United States.”
And that my friends, is where the sedition comes in.
References:
(1) Sedition and Domestic Terrorism – Sedition And The First Amendment
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: deval patrick, echo chamber, free speech, liberals, lies, morons, Obama, sedition
Obama Does Not Understand The Constitution
Apr 28, 2009 Political
I have heard time and again that Barack Obama was a Constitutional law professor and this was supposed to mean that his word held some kind of weight on issues regarding the Constitution. I have written before that Obama is no scholar when it comes to that important document and he has discussed how the courts should have undone constraints the Founder’s placed on government. Obama is a believer in judicial activism and thinks the courts should decide in favor of undoing what the Constitution enumerates.
Barack Obama has nominated a pal from the University of Chicago Law School to be his “regulatory czar.” Cass Sunstein is an anti Constitution moron who wants to enact things that he admits violate the Constitution. Sunstein is interested in regulating the Internet because, to him:
“A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government,” he wrote. “Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom’s name.” World Net Daily
Perhaps this Chicago thug and absolute moron is unaware but America is all about limitless individual choices whether it is in communications or any other arena and that this is absolutely in the best interest of citizenship and self-government. To this schmuck, we should ignore freedom in order to regulate FREE SPEECH. I wonder if he feels that burning a Flag is OK or if that is not in the interest of citizenship…
This moron is also in favor of a system that would not allow emails to be sent for a 24 hour “cooling off period” in order to regulate the nasty emails that sometimes get sent. I agree that people often send emails when they are mad and regret it later but that is a decision with which they have to live. It is not up to government to regulate how we communicate in the name of civility.
He is also in favor or requiring posts on the Internet to have links to OPPOSING views. Call it the Internet Fairness Doctrine. He does not believe that you have the right to seek out only the opinions that you desire. In other words, you should be required to look for differing views. This guy is an idiot and has admitted as much when he stated that this view would “almost certainly [be] unconstitutional.”
This guy is an absolute disaster and as anti American as they come. He should not be confirmed to run anything and should be locked up in Gitmo for his anti American activities and beliefs. Here are a few other things this Communist, anti American believes:
- In a 2007 speech at Harvard he called for banning hunting in the U.S.
- In his book “Radicals in Robes,” he wrote: “[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms.”
- In his 2004 book, “Animal Rights,” he wrote: “Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives …”
- In “Animal Rights: A Very Short Primer,” he wrote “[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, in scientific experiments, and in agriculture.”
This guy believes that all gun control legislation is in agreement with the Constitution and believes that the Second Amendment does not confirm an individual right to bear arms. He is absolutely WRONG on this. The guys who wrote the Constitution had a big discussion on this and they all said that the right to keep and bear arms was an individual one. That settles the issue. We do not need revisionists changing the Constitution. We need to stick to the Founder’s intent and we will have no problems. What kind of Constitutional scholar is unaware of this?
This guy also believes that hunting should be banned and that animals have the right to sue and have humans as their representatives. Is this man on some of Obama’s leftover stash? The guy is out of his ever loving mind and if he is confirmed we will have all kinds of unconstitutional things flying around.
Why should this guy surprise us? He is no different than Obama who believes the Constitution is too restrictive. Hell, Obama must agree with this brain dead parasite because Obama selected him and then praised him:
“As one of America’s leading constitutional scholars, Cass Sunstein has distinguished himself in a range of fields, including administrative law and policy, environmental law, and behavioral economics,” said Obama at his nomination of his regulatory czar. “He is uniquely qualified to lead my administration’s regulatory reform agenda at this crucial stage in our history. Cass is not only a valued adviser, he is a dear friend and I am proud to have him on my team.”
All one needs to do is read what this guy wrote and listen to what he beleives and it will be clear that he is not a Constitutional scholar, he is not distinguished, and that he is not uniquely qualified.
He is anti American and he is an idiot. His brain is rotted from too many drugs.
I don’t know if he will be confirmed or not but if he makes it in I intend to ignore anything he wants to regulate.
No dissenting links, no ban on hunting and no gun control for me.
And if he and Obama do not like it they can go back to law school and learn what the real Constitution says.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: chicago, constitution, Democrats, gun control, hunting, liberals, morons, Obama, regulatory czar, sunstein, thugs
What Are Our Leaders Smoking?
Feb 24, 2009 Political
The United States is basically bankrupt. We have trillions in debt (real debt, not the phony debt they push) and we have just vowed to spend a trillion dollars we do not have. Hillary Clinton is in China begging the Chinese to buy more of our worthless bonds so we will have money to pay our bills and every time one turns around the government is coming up with some new multi million or billion dollar plan to bailout someone or fix some perceived crisis. One would think that the last thing we would do is spend our money in other countries, especially countries where the people do not like us.
The United States has pledged to spend 900 million dollars to help rebuild Gaza after it was destroyed when Israel defended itself from terrorists shooting rockets. Why are we spending more money we do not have to rebuild a place that has no desire to live in the modern world? Why are we spending money on people who hate us and who routinely demonstrate while shouting “Death to America?” Have we lost our minds?
All I want to know is what kind of drugs the people running this country are smoking.
If Gaza needs to be repaired (and the destruction might actually be a step up) then let Saudia Arabia, Iran, Syria, and all the other Jew hating countries pony up the cash for it. We should not be spending money on them for any reason whatsoever and we definitely should not be giving the money to the UN to distribute. This money will end up in the hands of Hamas and be used to buy weapons.
Even if unbiased observers watched them use the money to do really nice things it still would not be justified. The people there hate us and spending our money on them is absolutely moronic.
If our politicians are not required to take drug tests now would be a great time to start such a program. Only people stoned out of their minds could come up with such a plan.
*This plan requires Congressional approval.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]