This is perhaps one of the most thoughtful, response about the Ferguson situation. I hope and wish that more people read it, understand it and learn from it.
While I agree with Mr. McDaniel on the substance of his article, I disagree on some of the consequences he predicts for now. Two quick reasons, the EO only accomplishing in “officially” articulating what has been already public policy of this administration. The second reason is that it will not affect as many people as is has been claimed, for a variety of reasons but mostly due to another problem in our country, a bloated, inefficient government bureaucracy. You can read the new guidelines for the handling of illegals at:
The issuing of work permits is separate and will post as soon as more information is available. As Mr. McDaniels adds in response to a comment;
“If Mr. Obama had actually considered immigration “reform” a matter of importance, he had two solid years with absolute control of Congress, yet he chose to do nothing. Thereafter, he said, in public, more than 20 times that he did not have the lawful authority to do what he has done. Now Mr. Obama is claiming he waited six years and just got impatient. His lips were moving, so he was lying.
Congress fails to do something the President wants? Too bad. That’s our system of government; that’s checks and balances. That’s lawful.
Congress fails to do something less than a majority of Americans want? Too bad. That’s lawful, and if the people don’t like it, they can vote them out. That’s lawful too. They had their chance on November 4, and they repudiated Barack Obama and cleaned house on the Democrats.
Obstructionist? That’s lawful too, and if the people don’t like it, they can vote them out. But let’s remember that the House has sent more than 300 bills to the Senate, where Harry Reid, surely acting under orders from Mr. Obama, has not so much as allowed a vote on any of them. The people didn’t like that and gave control of the Senate to Republicans, kicking Reid out. All completely lawful and within the Constitution.
Even if one likes what Mr. Obama has done–the result–the means are entirely wrong, unlawful, and harmful to America.”
On Friday, November 21, 2014, Americans rose from slumber in a new nation, a nation not conceived in liberty, nor dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.By the blatantly unconstitutional ruses of “prosecutorial discretion” and imperial impatience, President Obama has swept away any restraint on presidential whim. He now unquestionably rules by edict, and all Americans are no longer free men and women, but subjects liable to awaken tomorrow to find more and more of their liberty, their opportunity, their ability to live their lives as they choose, gone.
President Obama has thrown down the last, definitive card. If all of his previous usurpations of the powers of the legislative branch, if every instance of his demonstrated contempt for the very real and specific constitutional limitations on executive power were not enough, his immigration power grab has made it plain: if he gets away with it…
View original post 1,524 more words
Keith Hennessey, has a great break-down on Gruber, the MIT economist and his view on the “stupidity of American voters”. The same thought process is often applied to other Progressive policies, like Climate Warming, Immigration, Voter ID, etc. I will expound on one of his points of utilizing experts and science as validation for their policies in another post.
Elections season is over. There are some celebrating, while others are still in shock. The finger-pointing has begun for some, while others are lining up the excuses. Others on the other hand are trying to game the system because it failed them.
The President has invalidated the results because only 1/3rd of the Nation bothered to vote in the Mid-Terms, leaving the other 2/3rds without a say in the matter. We cannot take the word of the minority as either a mandate or rebuke to his party or his policies.
The Tyranny of the Minority, is that they flipped the Senate from Democrat Party control to Republican, a terrible thing, indeed! How can we allow a minority of the people have the control to make such momentous decisions! It was not a national election! It was just a … National Election where all the seats in Congress we up for grabs and 36 of the 100 Senates seats would be determined. Oh, I almost forgot 72% of the State Governors (36) were up for election as well.
I would say that the President misspoke, it is just as likely that 2/3rds of the country opposed him and just voted by not bothering to cast a vote. Or that since he personalized the election when he said on Oct 2nd; “I am not on the ballot this fall. Michelle’s pretty happy about that. But make no mistake: These policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them,” that only 1/3rd of the population supports his administration and that is why the Republicans won.
More telling is that the first minority-elected President would use this argument or excuse as to why the Republicans gains are not meaningful is more important. After all his coalition that got him elected and re-elected is composed of minority groups which he managed to play against each other in order to win. Now that this coalition is not succeeding he just dismisses the results.
There are others making this same argument as this editorial from Newark’s Star-Ledger complains:
The problem is that all states, big or small, get the same two seats in the Senate. That gives a nearly vacant state like Wyoming the same heft as California or New York. It gives a voter in Cheyenne 66 times more power than a voter in San Francisco in shaping the Senate.
Tom Moran the author of the editorial is not stopping there, he cites another reason for the Republican’s success which also blames those long dead “White Guys” (Founding Fathers) that wrote the Constitution.
The founders gave states the power to draw their own district lines, and both political parties have used it shamelessly through our history. The core idea is to draw district lines so that your opponents win big in just a few districts, wasting as many votes as possible.
Republicans happen to have the advantage after the 2010 census, so it was their turn to make mischief.
Gerrymandering, named after Governor Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts and salamander in 1812 after he redrew an district that had the shape of a salamander. This excuse which I have seen repeated in several Leftist sites and repeated by several Prog commentators is especially rich, since gerrymandering has long been used by Democrats to preserve “Minority Districts”, and would have not effect on state-wide Senate or Governor races where Congressional Districts don’t apply.
The same gerrymandering that produced Texas 30th Congressional District created in 1991 after the 1990 decennial Census allotted Texas extra seats.
This was one of 3 such districts that were intended to increase minority voting districts. Texas Governor George Bush opposed the new district as racial considerations were only considerations to the districts odd dimensions. In 1996, the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision agreed and the district had to be redrawn. There are many District 30s out there but since districts are only redrawn every 10 years, unless there is a change of party affiliation in charge there is not impetus to fix the gerrymander.
Many of those complaining about gerrymandering are on record as supporting the practice in order to increase minority voting districts and increase their odds of gaining control of Congress. Now that the Congressional map is not as favorable this old dead White Guy legacy has to be relegated to history and State with a larger population need a larger proportion of Senators.
The Republicans won big, not only did they flipped the Senate, they also padded their Majority in Congress. They also added 3 extra more Governors with the Alaska still in contention but who regardless of the winner will caucus with the Republicans. That would make 29-30 Governors out of the 50 States. Some minority!
I guess this is more indicative of Progressives mentality, it is only good if it helps their cause. Otherwise it is antiquated, misguided, discriminatory and worst of all conservative. The idea of 2 Senators per State was designed with express purpose of preventing larger more populous States of being able to solely dictate policy and demolish the participation of smaller less populous States. Originally, the State’s Legislature would pick who would represent their own States.
This arrangement worked well until 1913 when the 17th Amendment was ratified. Long sought by Progressives since the 1890’s and its chief supporter Williams Jennings Bryan who ran for President 3 times losing in every occasion, and was serving as President Wilson’s Secretary of State at the time of the Amendment passage.
Interesting enough the 1890’s (the process had started years earlier) the Democrats regaining control of Southern States and changing their own Constitutions to restrict the Black vote. Poll taxes, grandfather laws and other means were used to restrict or deny the Black population their right to vote especially since in many Southern States Blacks constituted a large part of the population, a majority in many of those same States.
I should also note that the first Black Senator, Hiram Rhodes Revels in 1871 and the second Blanche Bruce in 1875 were both elected by the Mississippi Legislature under the original system. It was not until Edward William Brooke III from Mass. was elected in 1966 that we would see another Black Senator in Congress. All 3 were also Republican. This election Republican Tim Scoot became the 1st Black Senator elected by popular vote in the former Confederate States.
The MSM has made much of the perceived ideological Right shift of the Republican Party, emphasis and demonizing the Tea Party influence for instance. The ideological shift Left of the Democrat Party which began in control its caucus in 2006 has been all but ignored. In 2006 the dissatisfaction with the Middle East Wars, the misrepresentation of the Bush Administration’s handling of Katrina among other things paved the way for the 2008 election of President Obama in a wave election as a result of that;
In 2009, Democrats had 60 senators, when you include the two independents who caucused with them; in 2015, they will have 45.
In 2009, Democrats had 256 members of the House; in 2015, they will have 192.
In 2009, Democrats had 28 governors; in 2015, they will have 18.
In 2009, Democrats controlled both legislative chambers in 27 states; in 2015, they will control only 11.
In 2009, Democrats controlled 62 legislative chambers; in 2015, they will control only 28 (with one tie and two still undecided).
The results of those 2 elections were rolled back beginning in the wave 2010 elections by the Republicans and in 2012 though minor loses on National offices, there made gains in many States in local elections, either consolidating or flipping local Legislatures.
MId-terms elections are really about your motivating your base. Historically, the President’s party suffers some loses in Mid-Terms only 3 times in 1934, 1998 and 2002 have the President’s party made gains on the Mid-Terms. Looking at shorter-term trends, after this past election it would mean that from 1994 until at least 2016 the Republicans would have control of the Senate for 12 yrs and House for 18 yrs something that should concern the Democrats.
The successes of by the Democrats in 2006 and 2008 appear an aberration rather than a trend. If President Obama and his Party want to deceive themselves and believe the cheering media that is on them. In the meantime as the President alluded to the Tyranny of the Minority will continue. How long before this minority is considered a majority, I guess we will have to wait until 2016.
Mark Steyn’s has a new post on his site that touches on the subject in my previous post. His is entitled: The Reformation of Manners, though manners have very little to do with the issue. A primer:
“Underneath the watchful eyes of the digital panopticon, however, the Islamization of the west will continue. Not every Muslim wants to chop your head off. Not every Muslim wants to “groom” your 11-year-old daughter. But these pathologies nest within Islam, and thrive at the intersection of Islam and the west. As long as Islam is your biggest source of population growth – to the point where Mohammed is now the most popular boy’s name in Oslo – you’re not “tackling” the issue, and certainly not “head on”.
“In a bizarre column even for the post-Conrad National Post, Afsun Qureshi suggests the best thing you could do to lessen the likelihood of being set upon by Muslims is to learn to recite the shahadah, “a testimony to the identity of Allah as the one true God, and Muhammad as his prophet”. She might be right. Wearing a burqa might help, too. Or the shalwar kameez. On the other hand, most of those Syrian men paraded through the desert in their BVDs to their rendezvous with death knew the shahadah, and a fat lot of good it did”
The last paragraph a reference to an article in the National Post, one of Canada’s leading newspapers who an article that must be read to be believed. Wether willingly or unknowingly is proposing that we pretend to be Muslims in order to co-exists with Muslims. This plays into the same message that groups like ISIS are using to recruit impressionable recruits; Inevitability. They all preach that “Allahu Akbar”, their God is Greater, join us or be else.
Steyn concludes as follows;
So now, in the new multiculti Britain, the child sex trade is back, as part of the rich, vibrant tapestry of diversity – along with Jew-hate, and honor killings, and decapitation porn. The solutions to the internal contradictions of multiculturalism are (a) David Cameron’s expanded security state; (b) Afsun Qureshi’s universal prostration before Islam; or (c) an end to mass Muslim immigration. The last is too obvious for any viable western politician ever to propose it.
Read the whole thing.
I have tried to stay clear of this mess but the similarities to the Trayvon Martin case, from the same tactics to the inclusion of the same lawyers of Crump and company have made this impossible to not discuss.
Here’s is a great recap from Mike, which covers much of what has happened. I will only add the following to his recap;
The Governor, Democrat Nixon has deployed the National Guard to the area, after the events of last nights where 2 people were shot, cops were shot at and at least 7 arrest were made.
Missouri State Police Captain Ron Johnson is also a Ferguson native which was hoped would help in the situation.
The lawyers for the family, despite the forensic evidence from their own autopsy insist that one of the shots was from the back and his hands were up.
Finally, they are starting to call for the arrest of Officer Wilson. The call all we want is an arrest, a familiar refrain during the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case has begun.
Missouri State Police Captain Ron Johnson is a tall, big, imposing black man. He was sent to Ferguson, Missouri to dialogue with the people, to get down with them, to be a bridge over troubled waters. Unfortunately, he forgot his place; he forgot who and what he was. I am not, gentle readers, referring to race, at least not in that context.
Ferguson, and the rest of America, are seeing community organizing at work. Descending on Ferguson are Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, Benjamin Crump–an attorney heavily involved in the George Zimmerman persecution-and the race hustling surrounding that prosecution–the New Black Panthers, and a variety of other race hustlers, media fellow travelers, and other social parasites.
Johnson, much of the media, and surely Johnson’s superiors apparently thought that because he is black and successful, he would have some magic power over the crowds and could establish “dialogue” and…
View original post 1,621 more words
Of the 10 reasons that an alliance with Iran in Iraq is a bad idea, number 4 is especially poignant.
“(4) Leftists in general, and Obama and his advisors in particular, believe that merely talking with one’s deadliest enemies is a highly significant accomplishment in and of itself. This delusion is particularly dangerous.”
This has been the Obama’s administration go to gag, anytime his administration is in a bind. He recites a speech, and that is about all he does. His belief that his power of persuasion by the spoken or written word to drive policy is a reason his foreign policy is in shambles right now.
Words can sometimes help to solve problems when both sides can agree on the solution, but when those words are diametrically opposed to their own belief system they become just blustering at best, a waste of time and extremely dangerous at worst.
Obama’s presidency has been all about “resetting” the foreign policy of the US, by talking and talking and talking. The words may make us feel good about ourselves but carry no weight if not backed by other means. A lesson this administration has yet to learn.
While President Obama is surely incompetent–particularly in foreign policy–he’s not alone. Washington is a virtual fever swamp of idiocy, asFox News Reports:
The Obama administration, unable to move the needle in the three-year-old Syrian civil war, now finds itself on the verge of moving toward a ‘my enemy’s enemy’ foreign policy with Iran in order to keep Iraq from falling apart next door.
The possibility of partnering with Iran to deal with a common foe — a radical Sunni militant group bent on regional domination — has immediately divided some of the Obama administration’s toughest critics.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the idea of an alliance of convenience with Iran the ‘height of folly.’
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who typically is in lockstep with McCain on national security matters, on Sunday, though, likened it to the U.S. aligning with Stalin during World War II, because he ‘was not…
View original post 418 more words