Impeachment: "Perilously Close"

Though a supporter of impeachment, it is probably not right for this time in our nation's history.  But he should never had made a second term based upon lack of experience (1st term issue), failure to deliver, disastrous health care plan, foreign fiascos and irresponsible words as leader of free nation that incite fridge individuals.  

So, we are in a quagmire. Impeachment should happen. If this president were white...he'd have been removed by now. Constitutionally, he may be "perilously close" but what about actions that are treasonous or flat irresponsible as a President? Even if impeachment isn't viable, Congress should hold his feet to the fire.  The reality is...nothing will happen and further damage to our Constitution, fiscal stability and National Security will be the end result.  

With record numbers on entitlements and actively seeking them, instability in the world - with many seeing America as weak: 2016 is gonna be a tough run! GOP must get a thick armored skinned, Constitutionalist and solid runner.  Must be unafraid of the media and totally open at the beginning.  No skeletons. Charismatic. 

That person must pull the plug on the IRS, UN, EPA, TSA, amnesty drive, entitlements must be limited...basically, overhaul and reign in the Govt expansion. That person must promote friendship with Israel and cut off the billions of US money being sucked out if us by Egypt & pals.   We must tell the region to own up to their own responsibility to be sovereign nations and resist the corruption.  

We must purge ourselves of weak republicans and draw a line of solid unity.  All the while bringing conservative dems to the light of wisdom and reason for the benefit of our nation - not a small constituent number. Grass roots support for America as she has always been until the recent decade must swell and be well spoken. 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/tom-coburn-obama-impeachment-95822.html#comment-1014161152

So...Who is the real Obama?

America is by no means perfect, nor is it filled with perfect persons. In fact, quite the opposite. However, the foundations of the government in which we live, work and play are solid, bed rock secure tennants that will carry us for another few hundred years.....if....the imperfect, self-seeking, money-bribed, brain-washed (dead), leaders do not destroy the very foundations in which they were (oddly enough, yet not surprisingly) elected. The Constitution is the document in which decisions, politically, ought to be based. Not far-fetched, half-truths that are barely considerate of the Constitution.

So...from the top down we have crazies out there. They don't know their right hand from their left. Here, we enjoy (?!?) a compilation of Obama's own words. Please retweet - I believe many others will agree that this man has no clue, no busines being in his position and has no understanding of the Constitution outside of his Progressive (albeit, Marxist) ideaology:

Infanticide, per Obama (IL Sen, 2008)

 

From Obama's March 30, 2001 remarks on the Illinois Senate floor:

OBAMA: This bill was fairly extensively debated in the Judiciary Committee, and so I won't belabor the issue. I do want to just make sure that everybody in the Senate knows what this bill is about, as I understand it. Senator O'Malley, the testimony during the committee indicated that one of the key concerns was — is that there was a method of abortion, an induced abortion, where the — the fetus or child, as — as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb. And one of the concerns that came out in the testimony was the fact that they were not being properly cared for during that brief period of time that they were still living. Is that correct? Is that an accurate sort of description of one of the key concerns in the bill?

O'MALLEY: Senator Obama, it is certainly a key concern that the — the way children are treated following their birth under these circumstances has been reported to be, without question, in my opinion, less than humane, and so this bill suggests that appropriate steps be taken to treat that baby as a — a citizen of the United States and afforded all the rights and protections it deserves under the Constitution of the United States.

OBAMA: Well, it turned out — that during the testimony a number of members who are typically in favor of a woman's right to choose an abortion were actually sympathetic to some of the concerns that your — you raised and that were raised by witnesses in the testimony. And there was some suggestion that we might be able to craft something that might meet constitutional muster with respect to caring for fetuses or children who were delivered in this fashion.Unfortunately, this bill goes a little bit further, and so I just want to suggest, not that I think it'll make too much difference with respect to how we vote, that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny. Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it — it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child. Then this would be an antiabortion statute. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional.

The second reason that it would probably be found unconstitutional is that this essentially says that a doctor is required to provide treatment to a previable child, or fetus, however way you want to describe it. Viability is the line that has been drawn by the Supreme Court to determine whether or not an abortion can or cannot take place. And if we're placing a burden on the doctor that says you have to keep alive even a previable child as long as possible and give them as much medical attention as — as is necessary to try to keep that child alive, then we're probably crossing the line in terms of unconstitutionality. Now, as I said before, this probably won't make any difference. I recall the last time we had a debate about abortion, we passed a bill out of here. I suggested to Members of the Judiciary Committee that it was unconstitutional and it would be struck down by the Seventh Circuit. It was. I recognize this is a passionate issue, and so I — I won't, as I said, belabor the point. I think it's important to recognize though that this is an area where potentially we might have compromised and — and arrived at a bill that dealt with the narrow concerns about how a — a previable fetus or child was treated by a hospital. We decided not to do that. We're going much further than that in this bill. As a consequence, I think that we will probably end up in court once again, as we often do, on this issue. And as a consequence, I'll be voting Present.

Abraham Lincoln & Economics

10 Poorest Cities in  America VERY INTERESTING ALL THE WAY TO THE END.... 10 Poorest  Cities in  America and how did it happen City, State, % of People Below the Poverty Level 1. Detroit , MI 32.5% 2. Buffalo , NY 29.9% 3. Cincinnati , OH 27.8% 4. Cleveland , OH 27.0% 5. Miami , FL 26.9% 6 . St. Louis , MO 26.8% 7. El Paso , TX 26.4% 8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2% 9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1% 10. Newark , NJ 24.2% U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 American Community Survey, August 2007 What do the top ten cities (over 250,000)     with the highest poverty rate all have in common? Detroit , MI ( 1st on the poverty     rate list ) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961 Buffalo , NY (2nd ) hasn't elected one since 1954 Cincinnati , OH - ( 3rd ).. since 1984 Cleveland , OH - ( 4th ).. since 1989 Miami , FL - (5th ) has never had a     Republican mayor St. Louis ,  MO - ( 6th ).. since 1949 El  Paso ,  TX- ( 7th ) has never had a Republican mayor Milwaukee , WI - ( 8th ).. since 1908 Philadelphia , PA - ( 9th ).. since 1952 Newark , NJ -( 10th )... since 1907. Einstein once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and  over again and expecting different results.' It is the poor who habitually electDemocrats .... yet they are still   POOR. "You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character  and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence. You cannot help people  permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves." Abraham Lincoln

Obama Wants Borders Wide Open!

(copy of letter from NumbersUSA.com)

Obama Budget Proposal Ends Immigration Enforcement Program

Dear Activist,

In 1996, Congress passed legislation that created the 287(g) program. 287(g) allows local police to voluntarily team up with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help enforce federal immigration laws. Agencies sign a contract with the federal government and then send several of its police officers through a federal training program.

In 2010, the Obama Administration stopped processing new requests from local agencies and made several policy changes that all but ended the program. The Administration is now taking its 2010 actions one step further by proposing to end all 287(g) funding in its 2013 budget.

Last year, however, the House of Representatives voted down an amendment offered by Rep. Jared Polis that, if passed, would have ended the 287(g) program. The House also voted in favor of increasing funding for 287(g). Despite the House's actions, the Administration is continuing its pursuit to end 287(g).

Earlier this week, our Chief Legislative Analyst Jonathan Osborne wrote a blog that detailed the events of a Congressional hearing last week where DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano attempted to defend the Administration's actions. Read that blog here.

Thanks,
Chris Chmielenski
NumbersUSA
Director, Content & Activism

Numbers USA
1601 N. Kent Street
Suite 1100
Arlington, VA 22209

180movie.com - Raw & Compelling

This needs no introduction other than: Totally worth 33 minutes of your day...even if you stop at 14 min and then pick it up again later!

HOFFA SUPPORTED BY OBAMA

I have recently tweeted more one liner and thoughts than have been on my blog.  That may or may not change.  If you have frequented the page, I much appreciate it. 

Arizona shootings happened and there was outrage against terminology about guns, crosshairs and anything else remotely "uncivil."  Of course, this was all pointed to the conservative, right wing wackos that actually had that guy come out and do the shootings....yeah, right.  We won't rehash, but the shooter was not conservative, nor right wing.

Since then, Obama has mouthed off as have so many others.  Today, the news is still around the Hoffa speech this weekend.  Hoffa was totally out of line.   Or was he? 

You see, over the ages analogies have been used in speeches left and right to emphasize points being made by the individual or the individual for the organization. In today's heavily politicized world where most everyone wears there feelings, faults and failures on their sleeve, this is difficult to stomach at times.  Hoffa's case in point. 

Then one adds a perceived family name and the connotations behind the name to the speech mix and you really have mental huddles to calculate and successfully navigate.  I have attached two links to the speech and wish to note that regardless of alleged editing, the words were highly charged words.

Personally, Obama put himself on the left-wing extreme when he followed the speech without any condemnation or constructional correction in his speech.  Google the speech and you will find that Obama supports and condones the words of Hoffa.  This is troubling.

Troubling because politicians, talking heads and other leaders are making devils out of each other.  Worse, we are threatening the 2nd Amendment against each other.  Fact is, if you get right down to it there are several of the Bill of Rights that are being threatened as we speak.  Where is this fact in modern media?  Where is our true watchdog?

Fringe anything is going to be in trouble, and the whole group ostracized and worse!  Case in point:  Jews and Christians.  For the most part, quiet, peaceful, loving people.  Most never even consider the thought of boycotting a funeral or "crusading" around and killing people.  Hasty generalizations such as these are troubling.  One might consider this even with Muslims...Sharia Law is one aspect that muddies the water when it comes to those of the Islamic Faith, but I'd say many Muslims are peaceful too. 

What do we do?  We stick with our Constitution.  We protect the identity of America through immigration laws.  We regrow a backbone.  Stand for something or fall for anything.

The truth of this speech:  it is not the problem, it is a symptom of bigger things afoot to dislodge America from it's leadership and prominence.  If we voted every career politician out and started over, that probably wouldn't be a bad thing.

Hoffa Yahoo link

Hoffa Real Clear Politics Link