Tag: Democrats

Only Obama Can Cause Default

http://visiontoamerica.com/16051/house-republicans-schedule-obama-impeachment-hearings/

Marc Levin broadcast Monday Oct 14th that only Obama can cause a default.  According to Levin, the US Constitution charges the President with the responsibility to pay all the debts of the USA.  It seems that Congress has the power of the purse but the President is the actual writer of the check.  Levin stated that under Article One of the USA Constitution the President is required to prioritize the accounts payable to assure that the government does not default.  Therefore, Levin stated, it is President Obama and Obama alone who decides whether the USA defaults.  Furthermore, Levin said that there is enough money presently in the USA checking account with billions coming in daily plus the end of year payments which can easily fund payments to our creditors.

The President, however, is constantly stating that it is the House of Representatives who will cause the USA to default.  Obama has broadcast again and again that Congress, namely, the House of Representatives, that is causing default and should be held responsible.  Levin, however, said that the Congress is powerless over default because the Constitution specifically states that the payment of our accounts payable is solely the duty of the President.  If the President refuses to pay the debts of the USA he is not carrying out his legal responsibilities, and he is not keeping his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the USA.

Levin made one power filled comment during his three hour program, namely, that the only job of the President of the USA is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the USA against its enemies, both foreign and domestic.  That is it.  Nothing else, at least in this matter of the credit of the USA, matters!

Marc Levin went on to say that he believes the Obama government is trying to usurp the power of the House of Representatives by insisting on seizing for the President the power of the purse and of passing laws and of raising taxes.  These explicitly enumerated powers are given exclusively to the Congress by the Constitution.  If the President tries to seize these powers for himself, he is acting against the Constitution and his oath of office and should be indicted by the House of Representatives by articles of impeachment.

Levin’s comments are very informative.  Unlike the above citied news article which accuses Obama of all sorts of egregious behavior, the Levin argument is based solely on the Constitution and the potential accusation that the President is not upholding, defending and protecting the Constitution.

Additionally, the present actions of Obama put him in the position of antagonist and enemy of the House of Representatives and by his many statements that the House is hostage to the so-called Tea Party adherents, who Obama claims are to be rejected, the President positions himself to illegally seize the powers of the House for himself, thereby abolishing the House and becoming a ruler.  This kind of ruler would not be checked or balanced by the House of Representative and would be ruling by presidential directive also called a dictate.  Obama would then be a dictator.

This writer is not putting this before you because I have any desire impeach Obama.  However, if Marc Levin’s interpretations are correct, and if future days play out a scenario such as he envisions, I also would strongly state that the House is required by the Constitution to present articles of impeachment against such a seizure of power by the President.

Listen to Obama and He Tells You What He is Doing

http://news.yahoo.com/emerging-senate-proposal-focus-budget-battle-140124033–politics.html

When Obama complains about the House of Representatives he is telling you what HE is doing and not necessarily what the House is doing.

He starts his radio talk by saying that the lack of communication does not need to be this way.  Translation in reality:  Please ignore that I have repeatedly refused and still refuse to negotiate with the people’s elected representative. Instead, blame them because they have insistently asked me to have a conversation with them which I have insistently refused to do.

Then Obama goes on to say that the demands of the people’s elected representatives is extortion and he will not bow to their demands.  Translation in reality:  I will not allow them to do what is their constitutional duty unless they agree in advance to give me what I want.  Please ignore my repeated threat of veto and ignore my Senate spokesman Harry Reid’s refusal to allow the House to pass legislation.  Instead blame the Republicans in the House who are hostages some bogeyman called the Tea Party Movement.

Lastly, Obama prefers to deal with his democrat party majority in the Senate for a budget resolution.  That is because he is confident that Harry Reid will continue to force every bill sent over by the House is Dead on Arrival.  That is if Harry even allows the House bills to be entered into the Senate agenda and not thrown into the garbage as soon as the papers arrive.

Not it does not have to be this way.  As Obama says, the branches of Government should not be antagonists and shout each other.  Translation:  Please ignore that I constantly used negative names for the House leaders and elected representatives.  Ignore that I always blame them and former President Bush for all the problems I have created.  Ignore that I have run up a seven trillion dollars deficit in four years.  Forget that I bribed Senators Nelson and Landrieu with federal funds in order to get Obama Care to pass.  And forget that on every vote in the Senate all, that is 100 percent, of the Democrat Senators always vote for Obama, against the House in order to stop all legislation from being enacted.

So the lesson learned is that we should listen to Obama.  But not to look at those he accuses.  Rather, to take his accusations and look directly at him because his accusations tell us what HE is doing.

Killing Gaddafi Produced Terrorism

http://news.yahoo.com/libya-car-bomb-hits-swedish-consulate-benghazi-103128741.html

The murder of Gaddafi, the Libyan President by forces useful to NATO produced terrorism and not the democracy and peace that Obama, Sarkozy, and Cameron promised. 

At the time of the illegal criminal aggression by NATO against Libya, the promise made by Obama and the rest of the crew was that they were only providing “cover” for the rebel groups.  The British, French and Americans had convinced the Russian and the Chinese that they should not veto the Security Council resolution on Libya because the intentions of the NATO European military alliance were to “level the playing field” and give the French sponsored and British supported rebels a change against the legal central government in Tripoli. 

France was once an imperialist colonial empire that fought against Vietnamese independence in the 1950’s. The French  had a very bloody war with Algeria in the 1960’s, trying to keep that North African nation occupied as a French colony. 

The British colonial empire is well-known.  It was subjugated a third of the world, keeping the Indian nation a colony until 1949.  During the empire period the British were feared as a brutal colonial empire that used government forces to kill any nationalist’s who opposed British rulership.  Remember, America fought two wars against British imperial control in 1775 and again in 1812.  Britain also helped the Confederates during our civil war. 

Ignoring both the French and British past as dominator of weaker counties, the USA under Barack Obama joined them in an unprovoked attack against the sovereign State of Libya itself a member of the United Nations.  At the time the Libyan government of Gaddafi was recognized by 101 countries as the legal government.  The attack, marketed as merely giving air cover to rebel groups, was factually illegal criminal aggression by the NATO military alliance.  Such aggression had been condemned by the Nuremberg War trials as War Crimes and Crimes against humanity. 

So what do we see today.  We see Libya no more a democracy than it was under Gaddafi.  Rather, the French sponsored and British supported ruling elite is a government not able to control various internal militias, it also cannot control terrorist groups such as the ones attacking the USA and Swedish embassy.  We see that the thousands of refugees displaced to southern Europe have remained in those countries.  And we see that the economy and standard of living among Libyan citizens has decreased. 

All that was accomplished was to replaced a stable and legal government with a European puppet regime on the “dole” to France.  We merely made matters in North Africa worse and invited increased turmoil and fostered more terrorism. 

Health Care Law should be Separate

I note the inherent prejudice of the report, namely, that the reporter states that the Republicans refused to fund the government and then the reporter modifies the statement that “does not also repeal or delay the implementation of President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare reform bill,…”  the reporter also notes that the House majority is Republican while he does not note that the Senate majority is Democrat.  Words are inportant and the word order used in a sentence influences the perceptions of the reader.  The reporter does not state the fact that the House has passed four funding resolutions that will keep workers working and keep government open.  All of house funding bills were rejected by the Senate.  As the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid said, “…the bills passed in the House which do not fund Obamacare are dead on arrival (DOA) in the Senate.”  Harry Reid is a Democrat.  Yesterday, the House passed another funding bill which would keep open all agencies closed by the shutdown.  However, because the house bill did not fund Obamacare, the Senate rejected it.  The House is repeatedly funding the government and keeping it open. The Senate is repeatedly defunding the government and closing it.  Hey, Obamacare is not functional yet.  It is planned to go into effect but the15 thousand pages of regulations need review and modifications.  History shows that taxes once inplemented and collected are never repealed.  Let’s take more time with the health care overhaul.   Let’s fund the government while we realistically approach this problem.  Please remember that it took a lot of bribery in the Senate such as the Nebraska bribe, the Louisiana bribe and the threats against incumbent Representative to get the health care law passed.  It also took Chief Justice John Robert’s extraordinary expansion, even rewrite of the law, to declare it constitutional.  We the people should demand that we separate from the current budget the health care law with it’s massive taxes, fees, fines and exemptions.  The health care law is too massive and too important to be lumped into normal congressional business.  It needs to be treated bipartisan .

USA Needs to Stay out of Syria

http://news.yahoo.com/afghan-civilians-killed-nato-airstrike-114608612.html

This article is a prime and potent example of why we should not attack Syria.  A missile, bomb or drone does not know the difference between the innocent and the guilty.  The bomb does not stop halfway to the target because it senses that there are innocent children there.  It just keeps on dropping until it blows up the target including the innocents who happen to be there.  The USA cannot lower itself to the level of the terrorists.

Congress must not support the Obama administration and an over zealous navy.  Sure, the Navy had a very small role in Afghanistan but they do not need to prove their value by attacking Syria from their ships.  Americans value their Navy and no amount of brazen aggression by the USA administration is needed to make us value them more.

To Mc Cain, Linsey Graham, Nancy Pelosi and congressman Ted Cruz:  Please stop your inane and insane posturing and calls for the USA military to participate in the wholesale killing , (can we say murder) of Syrians.  I heard our congressional representatives saying that they know for sure that the government of Syria used Chemical weapons.  Based on what?  They based it upon the CIA intel presented to them by the Obama administration.  This same administration came out today and said that it is an absolutely logical conclusion to assume that the government of Syria is responsible.  So?  Are we to bomb and kill Syrians based on assumptions  and logical conclusions.  Friends, we are talking about killing people!

I am embarrassed to refer my readers to the interview by V. Putin of Russia.  He called for conclusive proof that 1. The government of Syria ordered the gas attack.  2. That the regular army of Syria actually released the chemicals.  That is to me more democratic and reasonable.  Can it be that a former communist and KGB official is more democratic than the President of the USA.

President Obama.  Sir:  you said “no “to your cabinet officials who counseled immediate and devastating attacks on Syria.  You said “no” to those who advised you to go to war without Congressional approval.  Now, Sir, please say “no” to the assumption that the government of Syria is responsible and stand down the navy.  Withdraw our ships and stop CIA money payments and USA arms shipments to the Islamic rebels.  And at the same time, put the full diplomatic weight of the USA behind an effort to convince our friends in Russia and China that we are believable and willing to cooperate and collaborate with them to end the violence in Syria without demanding the ouster of the President of that sovereign nation.

Russia is A Major World Power Equal to USA

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-urges-nato-not-intervene-syria-interfax-094236818.html

The decision of President Obama to dismiss Vladimir Putin as a bored child is wrong.  The leader of Russia and the Union of Socialist States is not a neophyte on the world political scene.

Some US citizens would say that Obama had to show Putin that Obama was as tough as Putin.  Well, such wrong thinking is for those who think that the game of international relations is a personal contest between the Obama and Putin regarding  their “stuff”

A more reasoned approach would be to look at the recently ended cold war.  That era cost the USA hundreds of billions of dollars on troops and armaments while accomplishing nothing but the extension of fear and distrust garnered by the Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower administrations.  Fortunately, Khrushchev and Nixon started the end of the cold war with détente and the Salt accords.  They were followed by Gorbachev and Reagan, and GHW Bush who ended the cold war in 1989 at Malta.

The end of the cold war was followed by freedom for the satellite states of East Central Europe.  GW Bush enhanced our relationship with the former USSR by boldly cultivating a strong cooperative spirit with Putin.

It is very significant to note the political preference of the USA leaders who ended the cold war, gave a chance for freedom in East Central Europe, lowered the change of Nuclear war, opened the door to China and generally ensured world peace they were all Republicans and conservative.  However, they were also realists, pragmatists and they pursued the “realpolitik” of our greatest foreign policy genius President Richard Nixon.  Namely, they were tough on the principles of freedom and democracy.  They fully supported capitalism versus socialism.  But they were not rigid ideologues and took every opportunity for the advancement of peace and co-existence.

It is obvious that the Obama administration is following a different path.  Our foreign policy has been confrontive.  Beginning with President Obama’s speech in the Middle East, which started his administration, the USA has fomented revolution in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and now Syria.  These were called revolutions.  However, it is our own intelligence agencies and our secret money payments to the Arab brotherhood and affiliates that has enabled them to subvert the dominant governments and to overthrow them by force.

A big part of this subversive campaign is premised upon the idea that these governments are illegal.  But they were also our long time allies – Tunisia and Egypt and Syria, (Yes they were considered friends and allies and even used by the USA for the notoriously wrong rendition programs).  The result of USA policy under Obama has been to force the downfall of the Tunisian government, the murder of the Libyan President by US backed rebels, the arrest and imprisonment of the Egyptian `Hosni Mubarak and now the prolonged foreign backed insurrection against the Syrian Bashar Assad.

Surprising, It is V. Putin who has and continues to promote peace in the region while Obama promotes war.  It is Putin who is using the Veto in the UN to prevent foreign aggression against a UN member State.  And it is Putin who recently moved his war ships into the mediterranean in order to remind the USA Obama that attacking is criminal aggression.  All the while, it s the nobel peace prize winner, Obama, who is trying to rally the USA and the International community to kill Syrian soldiers, sailors, airmen government officials and politicians in retaliation for a supposed use of Chemical weapons.  And it is John Mc Cain, Lindsey Graham, John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi  who are supportive of killing innocent Syrians by three days of missile attacks.  Please remember that rockets, bombs and missiles kill people, innocent people, because a missile does not know a good guy from a bad one.  People will be murdered by USA bombs in the name of Justice.  Please shout NO, NO, NO.  This is not an option for the USA.

Once again, as we have seen in the past, the use of force and the pursue of war is because we have failed diplomatically.  Let’s not be a failure.  Let the USA not attack Syria.  Let Obama make up with Putin.  Let Hollande and Cameron stop their bellicose attitudes and let Mc Cain, Boehner, Pelosi and Graham stop war mongering.

George Zimmerman

http://news.yahoo.com/rallies-large-small-zimmerman-verdict-231947267.html

This is the USA.  We are a land of law.  The man was accused, faced his accusers and the jury heard the testimony.  They found him not guilty.  That’s the law.  Get used to it.  We do not try our people by the mobs of New York who are out for a spree on a hot Sunday afternoon.    Secondly, I seem to remember a man named OJ Simpson.  I was convinced and still am convinced that he murdered two people.  One was his wife whose throat he brutally slashed.  The other was Ron who was merely an innocent bystander who fought his attacker and was brutally stabbed to death in an epic fight for survival.  The murderer, who was covered in blood, got into his car and lead a police chase lasting hours.  The trial of OJ was also very public and many people were upset with the verdict.  However, they did not become mobs protesting in major cities.  Like me, they accepted the law as the law and the verdict of the jury as the final result.  However, personally, many of them still consider O J Simpson guilty of a double murder.  Like I said, this is America.  We are a land of law and the black people and the white people in the streets of our cities undermine that law and weaken our nation when they refuse to accept the voice of that law, namely the voices of the people on the jury.

One more comment, the lead article on the Internet tonight was, “Obama walks a tight rope as he responds to the Zimmerman case.”  Why do the so-called journalists write like that? The President is a federal official.  He is not supposed to comment on local murder cases, no matter if he thinks that Trayvon Martin looked like the son he and Michelle never had!  Also, it is not a tight rope because the duty of the President is to uphold the law.  Of course, maybe, President Obama does not like the law.  He constantly talks about circumventing the Congress and doing things by presidential directive and without the consent of the Congress.  He has even said that the constitution is an outdated document that often gets in the way of justice and progress.  Yet, he also swore his Presidential oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the US.  That oath is a sacred obligation and not merely words repeated for the camera.  So, no tightrope here.  President Obama is obligated to respect the law and encourage the people to respect the law.

How many people were murdered during the past several months?  How many were white?  How many were black?  How many had the case followed by the national media?  How many did Diane Sawyer present to her audience?  How many did Obama know about, comment upon, or even care about?  Yes, this case was sad.  Yes, we all wish it had never happened?  Yes, it was preventable.  But let’s get some perspective here.  Last week on a 700 mile drive on our Interstate highway system, I passed at least a dozen markers where young people died in car accidents?  Many were under the age of twenty-five.  The main cause was not drugs, or alcohol.  The main cause was texting and over tiredness. Does any body care.  Do the protestors in Times Square care?  I think not.  Deaths on our highways are routine and many people are suggesting the markers be taken down because they upset us.

How many soldiers died during the last year in Iraq and Afghanistan?  Do the protestors in NYC care?  Do they even know?  Does the New York Times ever report the statistics or the photos of the flag drapped coffins arriving at Dover Air Force Base?  Does President Obama ever comment on those deaths?  Does he know?  Does he care?

One wonders if America is worthy of itself!  One wonders why our police, firefighters and first responders even try to help a nation that seems on a course for self-destruction!  One wonders why soldiers should continue to carry out national military policy when the nation does not care and the President does not care!  Maybe America is not worthy of itself?

From this writers viewpoint, if America is torn apart by hate mongers, it only has itself to blame. If we don’t know better, we should.

Does Rep. Cummings think we are fools?

http://news.yahoo.com/democrat-irs-testimony-shows-no-white-house-involvement-162842119.html

It is beyond amazing that suddenly we have one lower level Republican IRS agent who claims that he and he alone is totally and completely responsible for the whole IRS scandal and Rep. Cummings tells the nation that alright, we finally found this lone Republican guy and all the scandal is wrapped up.  So he thinks we should just stop immediately, put this whole sorry scandal in a box and shelve it.  Amazing, that Democrats could find this lone Republican to take the sole blame.  Amazing, that the Democrats always knew that it was a conservative Republican who was to blame.  Amazing, that this relatively low level IRS employee should think of himself so highly as to believe that he and he alone is the center of the IRS scandal.

This writer believes that Rep. Cummings has found his knave and now he wants everybody to just move on.  It reminds me of Hiliary who said concerning Benghazi that ” Who cares now, they are dead, the deed is done, so let’s move on.”

It seems that the Democrat motto is that No one is ever to be held accountable except a Republican.

It is actually insulting that our Democrat congressmen think so little of the citizens as to dismiss our intelligence with “proof” of the bogey man under the bed.

Obama Should Stop Using Air Force One

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-cutting-own-pay-solidarity-federal-workers-033436986–business.html

More empty symbolism from Obama.  He gives back five percent of four hundred thousand, or twenty thousand dollars.  Good.  But if he used Air force one 10% less, he would save the government $179,000 each time.  So ten times equals 1 million 700 thousand which could be used to pay peoples salary.  The President doesn’t pay for anything, not food, or shelter, heat, light, water, lawn, repairs, phone, TV, travel.  All are 100 % paid for by the taxes of the same workers he is claiming to favor.  Even Obama’s lavish White House parties and hollywood studed extravaganzas are paid for by the taxes of the people.  Stop the lavish parties, I don’t mean State dinners which are a requirement of the office of President.  I mean the very expensive lavish and extravangant weekly private parties for his friends and political supporters.  Then cut all use of Air force one when used for political speeches and political Democrat fund raising and campaigning.  I guess, that would probably save tens of millions, all of which could be directed to funding the salaries of the federal workers he so publically supports.  But then, it seems, Americans and the media are more impressed with Obama’s drama instead of his actual accomplishments.  Its all style over substance.