Featured Post

Castro and the Nazis: Makes Perfect Sense

As we come up on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, we see newly declassified German intelligence documents reporting that Fi...

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Barack Caesar Obama Crosses the Rubicon: The End of the Republic Draws Nigh

We all wait with bated breath for the announcement tonight by our New Emperor defying the laws of Congress on immigration and putting paid to the creaky 238 year-old Republic.

Our new Imperial Master shall let us stupid ones know which laws we must obey and which we can ignore in pursuit of new wards of the state and voters for the ruling Democrat party.

Stay tuned for further announcements from the Palace.

44 comments:

  1. Congress still has the power of the purse if they have the balls to use it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The state controlled networks, however, will apparently not be broadcasting this affront to the Constitution. How quaint of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This would of course line up with the Pravda nature of these beasts. By not broadcasting they limit exposure of the crime. They will likely cover all the spin afterwards.

      Davod

      Delete
  3. The Obama administration needs to be more appropriately defined in relation to the human, educational and societal infrastructure influences that shaped what Obama himself has evolved into. He is a practised drug-abuser and pathological liar (a function of a missing father figure and lax familial and social environment in Hawaii whilst heavily influenced by Marxist Frank Marshall Davis). He openly supports and defends the insanity that is islam (a function of having NOT ONE but TWO moslem fathers and his life as a moslem during his formative years in moslem dominated Indonesia). Can anyone imagine a more dangerous recipe concoction to produce the confused anti-American stew we have on display during the ramadan and Obamacare Policy parties hosted at the White House?

    Everything about Obama’s past is suspect including his place of birth, parents and educational accomplishments. We do know that his sole qualification for POTUS is a dubious period as a community organizer (influenced by terrorist Bill Ayers and racist America hating preacher Jeremiah Wright) and unimpressive stints as Illinois and US senator.

    How this treasonous criminal achieved the 2 senatorships and POTUS, with his dubious background and lack of experience, will be a damning legacy on the American voting public, forever. It is the Americans to come who will pay a staggering price for lack of due diligence in vetting the fraud. It is on the shoulders of the coming generations to undo the incalculable damage this conman has wreaked on America, Freedom and Western Civilization.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't blame the voters. Years of indoctrination in the form of media portrayals of black people as uniformly oppressed, super competent or "magic" combined with the academic cultivation of white guilt allowed the construction of the mechanism that is BHO. An arrow direct from the Weather Underground straight into the heart of the country.

      Delete
    2. I think he became Illinois senator by digging up dirt on the Republican candidate, or was that the Dem candidate, forcing him to withdraw.

      Delete
    3. There is really no evidence that Obama/Soetoro/Soebarkah is black, since he lacks valid birth records. Even if Obama Sr. was his father, that side of the family is mainly Arab.
      With a mother (Dunham) and a conveniently appointed HI Health Dept. head to help forge a birth certificate, both belonging to the Subud cult, it's a real can of worms to research. We don't really know who this puppet is or who installed him.
      Most of us just know that he is pure evil.

      Delete
    4. Obama's biological father was Frank Marshall Davis, an employee of the Soviet Union who worked as a journalist at the American Communist Party's (ACP) newspaper in Honolulu. The ACP is based in Chicago, which was the hometown of Frank Marshall Davis.

      Delete
    5. The President was born in Honolulu. His long-form certificate is like any other issued in Honolulu that year. His father was Barack Obama, Sr. Barack Obama Sr was as black as the ace of spades, so, no, his family was not 'mainly Arab'.

      There are serious social and political problems to discuss. No serious person needs to be distracted by the biographical and historical fantasies of the world's maroons.

      Delete
    6. paul vincent zecchinoNovember 21, 2014 at 9:41 PM

      thank you for validating that he was born in Indonesia.

      Having examined many a vital record among other documents over the decades, that phony baloney pile of photoshopped parrot droppings gassed off on the Net never fooled me for an instant.

      Many knowledgeable observers deconstructed this fake ID in succinct detail.

      Obviously, judging by your overheated, moralistic, manipulations, commenters here struck not merely a nerve but a bundle branch.

      Delete
    7. thank you for validating that he was born in Indonesia.

      I take it that the latest fantasy is that Frank Marshall Davis knocked-up Ann Dunham in Indonesia.

      Ann Dunham met Lolo Soetero at the East-West Center at the University of Hawaii around about 1965, married him, and went with him to live in Indonesia when he returned home. What she would have been doing in Indonesia in 1961 is anyone's guess.

      Again, there was a hard copy of the President's 1961 long form sitting the Department of Health archives. There was a contemporary birth notice in the Honolulu papers that very week. Barack Obama, Sr and Ann Dunham had a social circle which included Neil Abercrombie, the current Governor of Hawaii. No one to date has produced evidence that Frank Marshall Davis was acquainted with the Dunhams in November 1960 (just months after they had arrived in Honolulu) while the association between Obama, Sr. and Ann Dunham is well-attested.

      Delete
  4. Matt, the Seventh ReaderNovember 20, 2014 at 2:51 PM

    I have a serious question regarding amnesty for illegal aliens. I know that Reagan gave amnesty to illegals during his administration but I am too young to remember the details of, having been a teenager at the time.

    What did Reagan do differently? (I nearly typed "as opposed to Obama" there, but it sickens me to put Mr. Community Organizer/Rabble Rouser in the same sentence with Reagan, the best president during my lifetime. )

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Work permits (work visas)
      leaperman

      Delete
    2. >I know that Reagan gave amnesty to illegals during his administration <

      no RR signed a bill into law that gave amnesty to illegals.

      Delete
    3. RR signed a bill that had been debated through Congress. It had a provision for a way to become a citizen and tossed a few more dollars into border security. I recall being appalled at the entire idea, thinking that this will just cue up the next 5MM illegal aliens. The Dear Golfer did not even bother trying to get a bill to sign, he simply decreed it.

      One of the basic things about this entire issue is the term "undocumented" immigrant. They are not "undocumented" they have "documents" from another country. If you want to become a green card holder, then get in line and follow the procedure. We can argue about the procedure and whether it should be changed but as of today, there is a procedure.

      Yes it is unfortunate for children born of illegal immigrant parents that while they are legal citizens, their parents are not and should be deported. This does not "tear apart families" (cue the tears and wailing) as the outgoing parents can take their children with them. Perhaps similarly, it is unfortunate for children born of squatters that they will be booted out of the house they live in because of the crime of their parents.

      One of the local radio stations here (KCBS) had a legal analyst discussing The Dear Golfer's EO. He said that one of TDG's excuses is that we cannot just deport 11MM people. Well what's to stop President Walker in 2017 from saying "Well we know that there are 45MM tax cheats who did not pay the Obamacare penalty but there are just too many of them to prosecute so I'm declaring an amnesty for them."

      Delete
    4. Exactly true. I've a good friend from Canada with an engineering degree from Waterloo who has been waiting more than a decade for a green card. He's virtually a constitutional scholar now, but it doesn't matter, because he's here *legally*, so he has to just wait in line while all the illegals get matriculated ahead of him.

      - reader #1482

      Delete
  5. There is an excellent article by Gabriel Malor "No, Reagan Did Not Offer An Amnesty By Lawless Executive Order" in the November 20 edition of the Federalist.

    http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/20/no-reagan-did-not-offer-an-amnesty-by-lawless-executive-order/

    The article needs to be read in its entirety but I will include the highlighted sections here.

    "What the Progressive commentariat is not telling you is that the Reagan and Bush immigration orders looked nothing like Obama’s creation of a new, open-ended form of immigration relief."

    "...Obama is clearly contravening both ordinary practice and the wishes of Congress—as expressed in statute—by declaring an amnesty himself. This is nothing like Reagan’s or Bush’s attempts to implement Congress’ amnesty."

    Davod

    ReplyDelete
  6. Obomber is clearly making law here.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/247320784/White-House-Details-on-Anticipated-Administrative-Relief

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hopefully the Supreme Court will step in and state that naturalization acts are to exclusive domain of congress, per Section 8 of the Constitution, which apparently doesn't get read much around the White House.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If only,....if only....if only there was a lawyer somewhere in the top offices of the country that had specialised in the Constitution with the understanding and the power to enforce the Constitution. We might hope that one day, a lawyer who specialises in the Constitution might find themselves in the White House, even as a consultant.

      Delete
    2. Doubt there is anybody who will even be considered to have valid standing to make this case. Maybe one of those congressional lawsuits?
      But really, the *constitutional* way to resolve this is through impeachment. Not saying it's gonna happen, just saying that's the mechanism provided in the constitution for resolving an issue where the President is accused of violating the law.

      - reader #1482

      Delete
  8. The American Weimar is ended in the fire of immigration.

    Obama has many months left in office. What other actions not taken by Congress will be brought into law by Obama’s speech?

    The Left in America is now powerful enough to rule without the consent of people or the forms of the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This current lawlessness revolves around actively not enforcing laws, if you believe Obomber. The next step will be to create new law from nothing.

      Delete
    2. Be assured he has a whole list of Constitutional outrages. He got away with this one so more to come.

      I hope the answer lies in breaking Democratic Party discipline and putting enough heat on 13 Democrat senators that they fear for re-election back home. Of course, so many retired after voting for ObamaCare that they think they have an escape clause.

      The States need to band together and act. That seems to be the best hope for prompt pushback.

      Delete
    3. Looks like Barry the Bastard is planning on showing himself for what he is the next two years. Let him. This also will show what the MSM has allowed itself to become because of their slavish loyalty to him. Putting Democrats on the spot and making them choose is a sure way to touch off an internal civil war. Maybe within the media too as they try to wash off the whore's makeup and zip their slacks.

      Delete
  9. Yesterday I found myself looking up the history of Parliament vs. Charles I, the last time English-speaking people confronted tyranny in their own country. Then I found myself wondering, is there a recipe for soft management of monarchs, short of formally curtailing their power? Of course these arts were practiced by wily courtiers and the brighter members of the upper classes under various European and Oriental kings, queens, emperors, and empresses. Just wondering whether there is an example of one of these systems that worked reasonably well for the subjects. I suppose it would take Good King Wenceslaus or the like for the serfs to prosper, and that would only be for his lifetime. Just thinking about interim measures until the Republic can be restored.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As a former visa line officer, this threatened (please, let it not happen!) action by Obama disgusts me to no end. We spend so much time and effort to have interviews only to break heart after hopeful heart in the nonimmigrant visa windows while Obama gets to play Santa Claus with other people's money and DHS-processing-time (my stepmother is stuck in Belarus with a petition pending for her for two years now....).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice to meet you, CT. I was also a visa-line scut who dealt with probable attempts to smuggle alien smuggling gangs' enforcers via fiance petitions and a number of other unsavory things. Further, having two grandfathers, a wife, a brother-in-law, and a daughter-in-law who immigrated via the legal route, I get livid when people make "immigrant" and "undocumented" synonymous.

      But, take heart. I teach school now, and once had the pleasure of explaining to a Dominican-born teenager why he and his mother had to wait seven years to join Abuela in the States.

      Delete
  11. And he released more muslims from Guantanamo. He's decided to thuck America, he don't care.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Diplomad, check out the online edition of today's 'The Australian' for a good roundup of what your president got up to on his recent visit here to Oz.

    Cheers

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately I have to pay money to read it. Do you have a link hat is free? I understand that he was quite insulting, as always, to his friends. Arrogant little turd.

      Delete
    2. Covered more remotely in the WSJ"

      http://online.wsj.com/articles/australia-rebukes-barack-obama-for-comments-about-great-barrier-reef-1416545507

      Delete
    3. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/obama-ignored-embassys-warnings-on-climate-change-speech/story-fnpebfcn-1227131290194

      http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/weird-speech-makes-obama-odd-man-out/story-e6frg76f-1227130149413

      http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/unlike-his-cairo-speech-in-brisbane-barack-obama-offended-his-hosts/story-fnkqo7i5-1227130151156

      Delete
    4. Not sure if those links will give you the articles free or not.

      In Australia, we recently hosted the G20. Our Prime Minister, and pretty much all the adults who came to talk about grown-up stuff, wanted to keep the focus on economic issues and wealth creation. The Chinese President and Indian Prime Minister both addressed our parliament and made very gracious speeches, scarcely mentioning climate change and only in the context of energy security and lifting people out of poverty. Obama on the other hand requested at the last minute an opportunity to speak to a young audience (uni students), didn't disclose what he was going to say even when asked, and proceeded to dump on Tony Abbott's climate change policies and scaremongering about the Great Barrier Reef dying despite the fact it's never been healthier. This has gifted the MSM here, who are just as left-wing and ignorant as their american counterparts, an endless stream of headlines mocking the conservative Abbott for being chided by the hip cool first black American President. Most Australians are completely clueless that Obama is a dismal failure as president, and think that any troubles he might be having is due to those evil republicans.

      Delete
  13. Mr. Mad,
    I myself have said that the O's supporters thought of him as a Caesar to lead them across the Rubicon, but personally I think he's another Cataline, and us in need of a Cicero, where do we find one?
    James the Lesser

    ReplyDelete
  14. Obama and the left are winning every hand of this game. Conservative tut-tutting and identification of which laws he is breaking is just white noise, he is getting all his policies in place and changing the very nature of American politics. The GOP sees only their own opportunity to inherit this new power one day and have no interest in stopping it. Graft and corruption on an epic scale is going to be the new normal for both sides. Unless the people start making the government fear them again, it's all over bar the shouting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you have touched on is the essential difference(s) between conservatives and (hawk,spit) liberals. Conservatives are generally but not exclusively law-abiding citizens who will toe the government line even if distasteful, pay their taxes and serve their country when and if needed.
      Liberals (hawk,spit) on the other hand see absolutely no stigma whatever in disobeying societal rules when it suits them, dodging any and all responsibilities to their fellow citizens whilst still proclaiming loudly and persistently however that only THEY know what's best for you. One of the biggest obstacles facing the USA today is this 'cult of celebrity' that so many people grasp. You only have to have two spoken lines on 'Days Of Our Lives' and the leftist media wants your philosophy on everything, conveniently ignoring the fact that apart from Clint & Arnie almost all Hollywood 'stars' and TV 'personalities" are exclusively wet liberals, tree huggers, civil libertarians and global warmenistas. Just don't get in their way when they're rushing off in the bizjet to Maui to watch the sunset with a jug of MaiTais and some good blow.

      Delete
  15. http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/

    we need to think about the beginning ti see tge future.
    even a child can see it.

    leaperman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leaperman, Thank you for this. I don't know who made the video, but I wish everyone could watch this clear, 10-minute explanation of what a Republic is and why that is the preferred form of government.

      Delete
  16. Back when all this was being bruited about, I wrote my deep indigo congressional delegation (rep. and senators) that they should write into the law a provision that every consular officer and ICE officer at every port of entry should have a big rubber stamp to put the word "sucker" in indelible ink on the forehead of every legal immigrant.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I personally believe that the "amnesty speech" was about as believable as "If you like your doctor…" I don't expect more than 10% of illegals to sign up for a three year work permit with no information about what happens then. The GOP Congress needs to step up now with a border fence bill and visa reform. Then we can talk about who gets to stay. If Obama vetoes them, it will be an interesting study of Democrat reactions.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is an object lesson for supporters of the republican form of government. When the person in charge of everything (the President) decides to break the rules, what happens? Who is there to say him nay?
    The next step of course, is for the President to decide that; due to the state of emergency and to avoid destabilising the country, it is necessary to delay the next presidential election. He will nobly sacrifice his earnest wish for retirement and nobly continue to serve the country.
    In a constitutional monarchy on the other hand, there is someone who can dismiss the person in charge when he doesn't follow the rules. this is what happened to Gough Whitlam in Australia in 1975. This is why a constitutional monarchy is a better practical alternative. There is always someone who can dismiss the guy in charge if he breaks the rules! (in Australia there are two, the Governor General and the Queen) It's a bit late to re-adopt the Queen, but perhaps some thought to who or what body could be trusted with the task of dismissing the president when he breaks the rules could be useful. The current system is fatoo long and laborious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The American method of dismissing the president certainly could use some rethinking. Re Republican form of government: in the video referenced above, the republican form of government that it advocates seems to encompass both parliamentary and constitutional systems. I don't know whether it's strictly correct to call a parliamentary system a republic, but the main point is to have a system in which the rights of minorities are safeguarded from the majority, there is rule of law, and the government is generally fenced off and not able to trouble the people too much.

      Delete
  19. The states have a pension crisis. Just curious, based on the precedent sent by the President, can governor's decline to enforce pension laws.

    ReplyDelete