Filed under: Foreign Policy, Iraq, Islam, Middle East, Military, National Security, Progressivism, Syria, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Prager University, The Islamic State, Thomas Jocelyn
Filed under: Crime, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Immigration, Law, National Security, Politics, The United States | Tags: Atty. General Loretta Lynch, Judge Andrew Hannan, President Barack Obama
We have immigration laws, but President Obama does not like them. He issued Executive Actions on November 20, 2014, and February 16, 2015, and DHS began implementing part of the President’s plan—issuing 108,999 three-year work permits to DACA applicants. He was addressing the approximately 4.4 million illegal aliens living in the U.S. without documentation. An alien living in the U.S. without documentation can apply to be eligible for “deferred action which will allow him to remain in the U.S. for three years. Based on that DHS will defer for 3 years the individual being removed from the country. Decisions would be made on a case by case basis. (DACA was Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. DAPA was Deferred Action of Parents of Americans, or anchor babies) Conservatives call it “executive amnesty.”
In December 2014, Texas and 25 other states filed a lawsuit in the Southern District Court of Texas to block these power-grabs.
The main grounds for their suit were the costs of issuing driver’s licenses and other associated costs of giving the undocumented immigrants legal status. Other issues being considered included exceeding executive power, failure to adhere to rulemaking procedures, and standing — the right of the states to challenge federal immigration policies.
The DOJ has since admitted that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) violated Judge Hanen’s injunction. Specifically, it filed an Advisory on March 3 informing Judge Hanen that, despite having assured him in open court and in written pleadings to the contrary, between when the President announced his Executive Action on November 20, 2014, and February 16, 2015, A Federal Judge when the injunction was issued, the DHS had begun implementing part of the President’s plan – issuing 108,000 three-year work permits to DACA applicants.
Filed under: Crime, Democrat Corruption, Economics, Education, Law, Police, Politics, Regulation, Unemployment | Tags: Crime and Punishment, Proposition 47, San Francisco
A year and a half ago, California voters passed Proposition 47, also known as the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act.” How could anybody vote against that? Silly, why do you think they give propositions names like that? What it effectively did was to decriminalize a bunch of crimes, including shoplifting.
What do you suppose would happen if you decriminalize shoplifting? For normal people it’s fairly obvious, but for Democrats it is puzzling. They believe that crime is the fault of society, bad parents, lack of a good education, poverty, drugs, or lack of opportunity, not the fault of the victim who stole something that did not belong to him.
So what happened to shoplifting in the absence of punishment? It more than doubled. It has made the struggle of small businessmen to survive far, far more difficult. Anything valued at less than $950 keeps the crime a misdemeanor, which means the criminals won’t be pursued and there will be no punishment. Some shoplifters carried calculators to total up the stuff they had grabbed to avoid re aching the $950 barrier. The ballot measure also lowered the penalties for forgery, fraud, petty theft and drug possession. You might get a ticket. It’s a slap on the wrist the first time, the second time and the 20th time.
Proposition 47 was backed by George Soros money. Newt Gingrich wrote an editorial in support of it.
It is time to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on locking up low-level offenders. Proposition 47 on the November ballot will do this by changing six nonviolent, petty offenses from felony punishments (which now can carry prison time) to misdemeanor punishments and local accountability.
The left’s interesting relationship with crime continues. President Obama told graduates at the historically black Howard University that they are living in an era of unprecedented opportunity, but he was speaking to the inequities blacks face. He excused crime at one point as a result of an “unfair and unjust system” and said that success is all just”luck.” He went on to claim that crime was a result ot the system, not the actions of criminals.
That’s a pet peeve of mine — people who have been successful and don’t realize they’ve been lucky. That God may have blessed them; it wuddn’t nothin’ you did. So don’t have an attitude.”
This line invokes his “you didn’t build that” gaffe from 2012 when Obama insisted that people with a successful business “didn’t build that” on their own and that government was really the catalyst for success.
The President’s commencement message is essentially that if you are black in the U.S. and you are successful, it was just luck and most blacks are held down by an “unfair and unjust” system that won’t allow them to succeed
What an odd point of view and what a troubling speech to graduates. If you are not responsible for your own success or failure—but it’s all just luck, then you don’t have to take responsibility for much of anything, and nobody can blame you for anything. Explains a lot.
Does that point of view effect the whole Democrat Party? California’s Prop. 47 goes right along with their Sanctuary City policies, and the decline of San Francisco into a remarkably dirty city. I can remember when if ladies wanted to go to “the city” to shop or attend an event, they wore hats and gloves. But that was a long time ago, and San Francisco was a different place.
Filed under: Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy, Humor, Immigration, Law, Mexico, Politics, Regulation, The United States | Tags: President Barack Obama, Rutgers University, U.S. Secret Service
As long as we’re looking for the lighter side of the current Political Campaign, President Obama just gave the commencement speech at Rutgers University. It must be exciting for new graduates to have the President of the United States speak at their ceremony.
After a couple of obligatory congratulations to the graduates and the name dropping of their favorite watering holes and greasy spoons, the President used his speech to tear into Donald Trump’s trade agenda, his Muslim ban, and his planned great big wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. He didn’t mention Mr. Trump by name, but it was rather obvious.
‘The world is more interconnected than ever before. And it’s becoming more connected every day. Building walls won’t change that,’ Obama said.
‘To help ourselves, we’ve got to help others, not pull up the drawbridge and try to keep the world out,’ Obama said.
‘It’s part of human nature, especially in times of change and uncertainty to want to look back at a long forgotten imaginary past when everything worked and the economy worked,’ Obama said.
And America did pretty much whatever it wanted around the world. Guess what, it ain’t so? The good old days weren’t all that good.’
As Mr. Obama was deploring Mr. Trump’s wall, the Secret Service is proposing to replace the White House Fence to double its height, from the current about six feet to nearly 14 feet and provide other measures to deter would-be intruders. “They want to build a fence that is tougher, taller, and stronger.” A great big fence. The old proverb is “good fences make good neighbors,”used by Robert Frost, but not exactly what either the Secret Service nor President Obama has in mind. But then, perhaps I’m just easily amused.
I vaguely remember who gave the graduation speech at my college commencement, but cannot remember his name or what he said. What I do remember most clearly of that day, was getting bombed by a seagull who deposited an indiscretion on my cap and gown. Maybe the Rutgers grads won’t remember a thing either.
[Note: the following was originally posted in 2008 on this infamous day]
Chances are, if you’re not from Washington or Oregon, the date May 18th has little meaning to you. Heck, even around here many don’t think of it unless someone reminds them. But I remember — every year. It’s one of the only world events I remember from back then — I was very young after all; but the eruption of Mt. St. Helens on May 18, 1980 was just the kind of event that little boys remember forever.
We were very fortunate; the mountain exploded northwards, but the winds carried the ash-cloud away to the southeast. I remember being somewhat disappointed that the ash wasn’t turning day into night for us like it was for all the people on the television. In fact, we didn’t seem to get any ash-fall at all, much to my chagrin; while people on the other side of the mountain were measuring it in inches, like snow.
So much excitement! …and so little pay off.
About the most exciting thing I personally experienced was standing on my father’s roof to see the enormous plume looking fairly small and unimpressive so many miles away. I’m not sure if we heard the explosion or not. They say people heard it as far as 700 miles away, and we were certainly much closer than that. I think we did — but that could just be my memory playing tricks on me.
So close, and yet so far. But I still remember it every year.
Where were you?
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Economics, Economy, Health Care, The United States | Tags: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, The Voters of Kentucky
Polls apparently told Hillary that voters, besides finding her untrustworthy, doubted her ability to grow the economy. So, in Kentucky, wooing a crowd, she promised that she and her husband would restore the economic prosperity of the 1990s. She has an assignment for her husband, she said, if they return to the White House. The former president, she told voters, will be “in charge of revitalizing the economy.”
“Because, you know, he knows how to do it,” she said. “Especially in places like coal country and inner-cities and other parts of our country that have really been left out.”
Mrs. Clinton mentioned her idea for her husband while speaking at a rally outside a home in northern Kentucky. Earlier this month, she said she had told Mr. Clinton that he would need to “come out of retirement” to help put people back to work.
It has been 24 (almost) years since the newly elected Clintons moved into the White House, so Hillary can probably be excused a lapse of memory. They came to Washington D.C. with a plan that they would be co-presidents, and the American people would get a wonderful two-for-one deal. The American people wasted no time in letting the Clintons know that they did not elect Hillary to be a co-president, and that simply was not going to happen.
Hillary made a lot of noise about not staying home to bake cookies, and other ‘don’t try to make me the “little woman” comments,’ but she fell in line. First Ladies usually have a cause they support — Laura Bush supported Libraries and reading, Ladybird Johnson espoused highway beautification, and wildflowers, Michelle has attempted to change what school kids have for lunch. I had to consult Google to find out what Hillary’s cause was — silly me, it was HillaryCare! One might consider that as food for thought. Besides, it was a Republican Congress that forced Bill Clinton to go along with their efforts to fix the economy, he just bowed to the inevitable.
Also interesting is that at the same time that Obama is out talking about the success of his tenure in office and his revitalization of the economy, the two Democrat candidates are talking about how awful the economy is and how the American people have suffered.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Economics, Economy, Europe, European Union, Politics, Regulation, United Kingdom | Tags: BREXIT, The European Union, Unaccountable Levithan
BREXIT stands for the British exit from the European Union, and the British people will vote on whether to leave or stay on June 23. It’s a very, very big deal. This is an hour long movie, so you’ll want to watch it in the evening. It’s very well done, with many of my favorite Brits explaining why the European Union does not work — Daniel Hannan, James Delingpole, Matt Ridley, Janet Daley, and Melanie Phillips.
The movie explains how the European Common Market seemed like such a good idea after World War II, how it morphed into the European Union, and what happened when the regulators took over.
It’s a remarkably Leftist Union, sure from its beginnings that control and regulation would fix all the wars and arguments and end poverty and hunger and, well you’re familiar with all the unfilled promises of the Left. When President Obama stopped by in Britain in April, he wrote an op-ed in The Telegraph to tell the British what they needed to do to get full U.S. support—which included staying in the EU, and unsurprisingly ignited a firestorm. Bad manners, but Obama would like the control and regulation and unaccountable government, as he has so clearly demonstrated. Angelina Jolie was just there to tell the Brits not to even think of leaving.
The movie explains how it all came to be and the immense, smothering, unaccountable bureaucracy that it has become. It is a dire warning to us about the rights and possibilities we might well lose if we continue to allow the Left to govern our country. Do set aside time to watch history being made across the pond.