Thread: "Obamanation."

You will never see this picture on any main-stream media station! Only a black lady could get away with that, even in Texas!
You Will Love This Photo

“He Had A Dream – We Got A Nightmare!”


Jul 09 2012

Please Share

Picture found on web email
AMEN...YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT, THANK YOU SISTER!!!


Please note 2 informational links:
U.S. Constitution Online – usconstitution.net/
The Complete List of Email Addresses and Fax Numbers for the U.S. Congress and Governors – conservativeusa.org/

Posted by:
Nathan M. Bickel
http://www.thechristianmessage.org/
http://moralmatters.org/



http://moralmatters.org/2012/07/09/he-had-a-dream-we-got-a-nightmare/

BREAKING VIDEO: ABC reports Obama may do something SUPER illegal tomorrow

November 20, 2014





According to the sources of ABC’s Jon Karl, Emperor Obama could grant executive amnesty as early as tomorrow.

Polls show that Americans overwhelmingly oppose amnesty, but Obama couldn’t care less about the will of the people. In his mind, only he and his elite liberal friends in a far-distant capitol are smart enough to know what’s truly best for Americans.
From Washington Free Beacon:

“I am told the president could issue the executive order as early as tomorrow,” Karl said, “this would be a far-reaching action that could grant legal status to up to 5 million people in the United States now illegally”…
The president has faced continued pressure from immigrant groups throughout his presidency, but refused to act because according to Obama he is not an “emperor” and lacked the legal authority to grant amnesty.
The inconsistency between previous comments by Obama and his proposed executive order have led to some confusion.
Karl elaborated on this issue, saying that the White House’s stance that Obama is not an emperor remains, but that he simply “has changed his view on what he can do legally on immigration.”

http://woundedamericanwarrior.com/br...egal-tomorrow/

A Liberal Explains Why Obama Is an Imperial President

Washington Free Beacon originally shared:

Liberal: "This administration is, in fact, the least democratic in the modern history of the presidency."

#Obama #WhiteHouse #Liberals via +Andrew Stiles 

BY: Andrew Stiles

November 20, 2014 1:44 pm


Seat of power. (AP)

President Obama is under fire from conservatives over his proposed executive action on immigration reform, which is scheduled to be unveiled Thursday evening. By acting unilaterally on such a controversial issue, they argue, Obama would be continuing a disturbing trend with respect to the abuse of executive power.
It wasn’t long ago that liberals were the ones complaining about executive overreach. Yet, after denouncing President George W. Bush for abusing our democracy for the better part of a decade, liberals have spent the Obama administration defending the president from similar charges.
Looking back on some of the left-wing criticisms of the Bush administration, it is fairly easy to use the exact same arguments to make the case that the Obama administration has been “the least democratic in the history of the modern presidency.”
That last line, for example, was taken a 2004 cover story for the New Republic by Jonathan Chait (who, in fairness, has been somewhat critical of Obama’s executive action proposal). Chait’s points about the Bush administration’s abuse of power can be easily applied to the current administration. The following has been appropriated, more or less verbatim, from Chait’s piece, titled “Power from the People.”
Later this evening, President Obama will announce his plan to effectively legalize millions of unauthorized immigrants without Congressional approval.
Here we have a sample of the style of governance that has prevailed under Obama’s presidency. It’s not the sort of thing you would find in a civics textbook. Obama and his allies have been described as partisan or bare-knuckled, but the problem is more fundamental than that. They have routinely violated norms of political conduct, smothered information necessary for informed public debate, and illegitimately exploited government power to perpetuate their rule. These habits are not just mean and nasty. They’re undemocratic.
What does it mean to call the president “undemocratic”? It does not mean Obama is an aspiring emperor. But democracy can be a matter of degree. Russia and the United States are both democracies, but the United States is more democratic than Russia. The proper indictment of the Obama administration is, therefore, not that he’s abandoning American democracy, but that he’s weakening it. This administration is, in fact, the least democratic in the modern history of the presidency.
Since Franklin Roosevelt made press conferences a regular feature, Obama has held fewer of them than any president. When he does appear before the press, Obama routinely refuses to answer difficult questions.
The administration has not confined its mania for secrecy to obscure policy wonkery; it has been essential to selling most of its signature policies. The Affordable Care Act would not have passed Congress had the administration shared its true cost and design. And both Congress and the public might have been more skeptical of the administration’s repeated claims that, as President Obama himself put it, “If you like you health-care plan, you can keep it.”
The Obama administration confronted this problem by mounting an elaborate disinformation campaign. Obama’s approach is thrown into stark relief by a White House memo from the Clinton years. “We have a line … that says ‘You’ll pick the health plan and the doctor of your choice,’” the memo read. “I know that it’s just what people want to hear. But can we get away with it? I am very worried about getting skewered for over-promising here on something we know full well we won’t deliver.”
Falsehoods were embedded in nearly every aspect of Obama’s sales pitch. To ensure that Americans would not learn the truth about the new law, the Obama administration employed unconventional means, such as hiring a public relations firm to help sell it to distrustful voters. The contract totaled $20 million in multimedia advertising—which, astoundingly enough, was financed not by Obama’s campaign, but by taxpayer dollars.
It is not terribly controversial to suggest that democracies function best with an informed public, and the administration’s inaccessibility and penchant for secrecy obviously hinder that. But Obama has done more than keep the public in the dark: He has actively sought to mislead it. Don’t all politicians fudge the truth from time to time? Sure. The difference is that, over the last few years, misinformation has become fundamental, rather than incidental, to the political process.
The Affordable Care Act was a model of enlightened deliberation compared with the process that resulted in the Senate immigration reform bill. Again, setting aside the substantive merits of comprehensive immigration reform, two pieces of public opinion data in 2014 stand out. First, only 22 percent of Americans, and just 27 percent of Democrats, favor an increase in legal immigration from current levels—one of the most overlooked aspects of the Senate bill. A clear majority of Americans prefer either a decrease immigration levels (41 percent), or keeping current immigration levels the same (33 percent). Second, polls showed that the public preferred legal status for illegal immigrants to be granted only after new border security measures have been completed, which would occur under either the Senate bill or Obama’s executive action.
But, if democracy requires a distinction between the interests of the government and the interests of the party that happens to run it, Obama and his allies have little regard for such discrimination. Obama’s use of the Department of Health and Human Services to fund propaganda on behalf of its healthcare bill was not an isolated instance.
The Obama administration has been just as brazen about misusing its powers over state secrecy. While the White House has restricted access to vast swaths of material, such as information regarding the “Fast and Furious” gunrunning operation, it has been extravagantly liberal in releasing information that suits Obama’s partisan interests.
But the most effective use of self-perpetuating power has been the particularly undemocratic way Obama’s party has run Congress, especially the United States Senate. It’s hardly new, of course, for the Senate majority party to run roughshod over the minority. But, with Obama issuing orders to Harry Reid, the trampling of minority rights in the last few years has been carried to a new extreme.
The Democratic majority, for example, routinely denies Republicans the right to propose or amend legislation. As a result, popular reforms—such as legislation to construct the Keystone XL pipeline—has failed to pass the upper chamber, even though a majority of Senators support it.

http://freebeacon.com/blog/a-liberal-explains-why-obama-is-an-imperial-president/


Stand Up America!!!!

Democrat Activist and Donor Indicted for Having Sex with 15-Year-Old Boy

Posted 2 hours ago by Gary DeMar

The way to cover yourself when you are doing something sinister is to hide behind something noble. It’s no surprise that many homosexuals enter the priesthood. They do it for cover and access to impressionable boys. Who would ever suspect a priest of wrongdoing?
Hollywood actor Pat O’Brien, the film industry’s model priest, would never do such a thing. How times have changed.
What better way to have access to young boys than to coach at a major university and use the high profile position to gain favor with the community? That’s what Jerry Sandusky is said to have done at Penn State:
“The trial of Jerry Sandusky on 52 charges of sexual crimes against children started on June 11, 2012, at the Centre County Courthouse in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania. Four charges were subsequently dropped, leaving 48. On June 22, 2012, Sandusky was found guilty on 45 of 48 counts of sexual abuse. Sandusky was sentenced on October 9, 2012 to a minimum of 30 years and maximum of 60 years in prison.”
Now we’re learning that a prominent Democrat activist and donor was indicted for allegedly having sex with a 15-year-old boy. He is 66-year-old Terrence Patrick Bean, the co-founder of Human Rights Campaign.”

Who would suspect someone who is for Human Rights to do such a thing? Matt Barber writes:
“Yet another high profile ‘gay’ activist has been arrested for homosexual assault on a child. This time authorities caught one of the big fish (a rainbow trout?). Terrance Patrick Bean founded the ‘Human Rights Campaign’ (HRC), which is one of the world’s largest, wealthiest and most powerful anti-Christian organizations. To this day he remains on the board of directors. HRC was developed for the sole purpose of pushing the extremist homosexual political agenda. Bean is also a major player for the DNC and a big Obama supporter.”
A story like this should not surprise us since there are no longer any sexual taboos. If moral and legal trends continue, there won’t be anything morally wrong with older men having sex with teenagers. If young girls don’t have to inform their parents when they’re going to kill their unborn babies, what makes us think they’ll have to tell when some man who’s looking for a young sexual partner to groom engages in sex with your child?
Elementary school children — fifth graders — are learning about safe anal sex, how to use "lubrication and how to insert condoms into the anus for anal sex."
The Oregonian describes Bean as “a prominent gay rights activist and major Democratic Party fundraiser.” I’m surprised. I would have guessed that Bean’s homosexuality would have been absent from the story, as well as his affiliation with the Democrats.
Consider this surprising comment from a USA Today article:
"This story was first reported by the local press, and there have been vague references to sexual trouble for Bean and Lawson since June, but the national media has not picked it up. That oversight is politically convenient for President Obama as he tries to pull off one of his riskiest political moves ever with his amnesty executive order.
"If one of President George W. Bush's bundlers would have been charged with child rape, make no mistake about it, the media feeding frenzy would have been uncontrollable – which would be legitimate given the severity of the allegation. The silence surrounding Terrence Bean exposes the national media's partisan double standard in obscene detail."
I guess there’s only so much that the liberal media can cover up.
How might Bean’s defense team spin the allegations? There are two ways to go. First, deny it ever happened. It’s Bean's word against that of a teenager. It’s the word of someone who founded the Human Rights Campaign against a confused 15-year-old boy. Who are you going to believe?
Second, Bean could argue that the sex was consensual. Again, it would be his word against the boy’s.
Consent is the new moral standard. As long as two people agree to do something together, that behavior is by definition moral. There have been those in the homosexual community who have been trying to lower the age of consent. If a 15-year-old girl can get an abortion without parental consent, then why shouldn't a 15-year-old boy be able to consent to sex with a man? Who's to say otherwise?


About Gary DeMar
Ambitious Italian American who adheres to his own personal code of honor. View all posts by Gary DeMar →


Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/18632/d...uhtGSOobPuF.99





We have degenerates in our houses and it appears they are on both sides of the fence and always lurking around!!!!

Obama on Amnesty: I’m going to break the Law until Congress Agrees with me… then I won’t be breaking the Law http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/11/ob...-breaking-law/

Obama on Amnesty for Illegals: I’m going to break the Law until Congress Agrees with me… then I won’t be breaking the Law - Freedom Outpost
freedomoutpost.com
Obama on Amnesty for Illegals: I’m going to break the Law until Congress Agrees with me… then I won’t be breaking the Law





Obama on Amnesty for Illegals: I’m going to break the Law until Congress Agrees with me… then I won’t be breaking the Law

Tim Brown 36 mins ago

On Thursday, Barack Obama addressed cable viewers in America and the Spanish speaking culture in the Northern Hemisphere. While the title of the article is not his exact words, they are the very principles he was espousing. Obama declared he would further ignore United States immigration laws, the US Constitution and Congress and just make up a law on his own to embrace millions of law breakers inside the United States in an executive amnesty proclamation.


While Obama began by recounting America's history of welcoming immigrants, which we have done, he then went on to say, "But today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it."




The problem with that statement is that everybody doesn't know it. Immigration laws are not broken. What we know is that his administration won't enforce immigration laws. That is what is broken. His administration violates the law. That is what is broken. Congress is complicit in his violation and unenforcement of the laws because they will not impeach him for the stupidest of reasons, like the one provided by South Carolina Representative Trey Gowdy. That's the part of the system that is broken.

To add insult to injury, Obama said, "Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules. Business owners who offer their workers good wages and benefits see the competition exploit undocumented immigrants by paying them far less. All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America. And undocumented immigrants who desperately want to embrace those responsibilities see little option but to remain in the shadows, or risk their families being torn apart."

Keep in mind that there are not only those that entered the country lawfully, but millions who are still waiting and have been waiting, even for years, to enter the country lawfully. They watch illegal aliens enter and then, on top of that, they listen to this man tell them it's ok for them to be here and they don't have to hide in the shadows any longer. Talk about an insult!

Obama then said he had done all he "could to secure our borders." Yet, it was his administration that knowingly orchestrated the crossing of the border by tens of thousands of illegal aliens, including convicts, gang members and diseased persons, even limiting Border Patrol agents' ability to enforce the law and defend themselves. Obama has released tens of thousands of convicted illegal aliens onto American streets. In what way has the man secured the border? He hasn't. He's just said that he has and hopes America will believe him.

Obama even had the audacity to claim that the numbers of those crossing the border illegally were cut in half. However, he failed to cite any reputable source for such a claim of "facts."

Because the unconstitutional amnesty legislation put forth by the Senate met a timely death in the House of Representatives, Obama declared he was announcing actions that he said he had the "legal authority to take as President" that would "make our immigration system more fair and more just." He failed to mention where he gets such authority because it doesn't come from the Constitution (and doesn't matter if other presidents did it or not in either party). He also doesn't speak to the injustice of not holding illegals accountable to the law or the unfairness against those still waiting to enter the country, does it?

No, Obama's announcement was one of lawlessness, injustice and unfairness. Here's what he announced in his own words:

• First, we'll build on our progress at the border with additional resources for our law enforcement personnel so that they can stem the flow of illegal crossings, and speed the return of those who do cross over.
• Second, I will make it easier and faster for high-skilled immigrants, graduates, and entrepreneurs to stay and contribute to our economy, as so many business leaders have proposed.
• Third, we'll take steps to deal responsibly with the millions of undocumented immigrants who already live in our country.

In dealing with the last element of his unlawful executive actions, Obama said, "Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable – especially those who may be dangerous. That's why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent."

There is no accountability to the law going on here at all. Obama is allowing those who have broken the law to merely come into the light, but not bring justice upon their lawlessness. That's not accountability. It's being complicit in their crime.

As for Obama's deportation claims, this is quite simply a lie. There is no truth to this claim. In fact, as I mentioned, Obama's Justice Department has released convicted illegal aliens onto the streets by the thousands. Deportations are down and he is facing a lawsuit from Immigration and Customs Enforcement for keeping them from doing their job. I'll ask Mr. Obama a more specific question, if what you say is true, then why is Farzad Dastmalchi, an illegal Iranian who works for US government defense contractors, still in America over a decade after 9/11? It's because this is all a lie. Perhaps Mr. Obama wants to address Don Rosenberg about the illegal alien Obama failed to deport, who ran over his son and killed him. I'm doubting he'll have anything to say since he has not responded to either of Mr. Rosenberg's letters.

While Obama presented emotional arguments about families their desire for a better way of life and such, he picked and chose whom he will allegedly apply immigration laws to and whom he would not.

Now here's the thing: we expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we're going to offer the following deal: If you've been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you're willing to pay your fair share of taxes – you'll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law.

That's what this deal is. Now let's be clear about what it isn't. This deal does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently. It does not apply to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive – only Congress can do that. All we're saying is we're not going to deport you.

One point I want to make here is this: Anyone, legal or not pays taxes. They pay taxes on everything they buy and every service they receive. They may not pay income tax, but let's be honest, many citizens don't pay income tax and frankly, that is a good thing. We should be seeking to abolish the income tax, not draw more people into it, but that's what Obama is proposing.

He also lied about what amnesty is and isn't. "I know some of the critics of this action call it amnesty. Well, it's not. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today – millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules, while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time."

Again, illegals pay taxes. They just aren't playing by the rules and Obama isn't going to enforce the rules, so he grants them amnesty. Is Obama not, in essence, granting those who have broken the law a pardon of some sorts as long as they come forward and fork over some money? He can add all the other caveats in his speech he wants to, but, in essence, that is what he is doing.

Barack Obama is violating the authority given to the Executive Branch under our Constitution. He is to be an enforcer of the law, not a lawmaker.

The most upsetting part of his speech was to somehow gloss over his lawlessness by referencing the Bible by saying, "Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger – we were strangers once, too."

The problem is that we do treat strangers (immigrants) in America well and don't oppress them. However, that is very different from welcoming those who are opposed to America, who wish her harm and have taken advantage of her and sought to undermine her foundations in their violation of law. This is ultimately what Barack Obama is proposing.

It is now Congress' job to impeach the man, regardless of who the Vice President is. Obama has long shown that he has not faithfully executed the office of the President nor has he defended the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That is largely due to the fact that he is a domestic enemy.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

The problem with that statement is that everybody doesn't know it. Immigration laws are not broken. What we know is that his administration won't enforce immigration laws. That is what is broken. His administration violates the law. That is what is broken. Congress is complicit in his violation and unenforcement of the laws because they will not impeach him for the stupidest of reasons, like the one provided by South Carolina Representative Trey Gowdy. That's the part of the system that is broken.

To add insult to injury, Obama said, "Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules. Business owners who offer their workers good wages and benefits see the competition exploit undocumented immigrants by paying them far less. All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America. And undocumented immigrants who desperately want to embrace those responsibilities see little option but to remain in the shadows, or risk their families being torn apart."

Keep in mind that there are not only those that entered the country lawfully, but millions who are still waiting and have been waiting, even for years, to enter the country lawfully. They watch illegal aliens enter and then, on top of that, they listen to this man tell them it's ok for them to be here and they don't have to hide in the shadows any longer. Talk about an insult!

Obama then said he had done all he "could to secure our borders." Yet, it was his administration that knowingly orchestrated the crossing of the border by tens of thousands of illegal aliens, including convicts, gang members and diseased persons, even limiting Border Patrol agents' ability to enforce the law and defend themselves. Obama has released tens of thousands of convicted illegal aliens onto American streets. In what way has the man secured the border? He hasn't. He's just said that he has and hopes America will believe him.

Obama even had the audacity to claim that the numbers of those crossing the border illegally were cut in half. However, he failed to cite any reputable source for such a claim of "facts."

Because the unconstitutional amnesty legislation put forth by the Senate met a timely death in the House of Representatives, Obama declared he was announcing actions that he said he had the "legal authority to take as President" that would "make our immigration system more fair and more just." He failed to mention where he gets such authority because it doesn't come from the Constitution (and doesn't matter if other presidents did it or not in either party). He also doesn't speak to the injustice of not holding illegals accountable to the law or the unfairness against those still waiting to enter the country, does it?

No, Obama's announcement was one of lawlessness, injustice and unfairness. Here's what he announced in his own words:

• First, we'll build on our progress at the border with additional resources for our law enforcement personnel so that they can stem the flow of illegal crossings, and speed the return of those who do cross over.
• Second, I will make it easier and faster for high-skilled immigrants, graduates, and entrepreneurs to stay and contribute to our economy, as so many business leaders have proposed.
• Third, we'll take steps to deal responsibly with the millions of undocumented immigrants who already live in our country.

In dealing with the last element of his unlawful executive actions, Obama said, "Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable – especially those who may be dangerous. That's why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent."

There is no accountability to the law going on here at all. Obama is allowing those who have broken the law to merely come into the light, but not bring justice upon their lawlessness. That's not accountability. It's being complicit in their crime.

As for Obama's deportation claims, this is quite simply a lie. There is no truth to this claim. In fact, as I mentioned, Obama's Justice Department has released convicted illegal aliens onto the streets by the thousands. Deportations are down and he is facing a lawsuit from Immigration and Customs Enforcement for keeping them from doing their job. I'll ask Mr. Obama a more specific question, if what you say is true, then why is Farzad Dastmalchi, an illegal Iranian who works for US government defense contractors, still in America over a decade after 9/11? It's because this is all a lie. Perhaps Mr. Obama wants to address Don Rosenberg about the illegal alien Obama failed to deport, who ran over his son and killed him. I'm doubting he'll have anything to say since he has not responded to either of Mr. Rosenberg's letters.

While Obama presented emotional arguments about families their desire for a better way of life and such, he picked and chose whom he will allegedly apply immigration laws to and whom he would not.

Now here's the thing: we expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we're going to offer the following deal: If you've been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you're willing to pay your fair share of taxes – you'll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law.

That's what this deal is. Now let's be clear about what it isn't. This deal does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently. It does not apply to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive – only Congress can do that. All we're saying is we're not going to deport you.

One point I want to make here is this: Anyone, legal or not pays taxes. They pay taxes on everything they buy and every service they receive. They may not pay income tax, but let's be honest, many citizens don't pay income tax and frankly, that is a good thing. We should be seeking to abolish the income tax, not draw more people into it, but that's what Obama is proposing.

He also lied about what amnesty is and isn't. "I know some of the critics of this action call it amnesty. Well, it's not. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today – millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules, while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time."

Again, illegals pay taxes. They just aren't playing by the rules and Obama isn't going to enforce the rules, so he grants them amnesty. Is Obama not, in essence, granting those who have broken the law a pardon of some sorts as long as they come forward and fork over some money? He can add all the other caveats in his speech he wants to, but, in essence, that is what he is doing.

Barack Obama is violating the authority given to the Executive Branch under our Constitution. He is to be an enforcer of the law, not a lawmaker.

The most upsetting part of his speech was to somehow gloss over his lawlessness by referencing the Bible by saying, "Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger – we were strangers once, too."

The problem is that we do treat strangers (immigrants) in America well and don't oppress them. However, that is very different from welcoming those who are opposed to America, who wish her harm and have taken advantage of her and sought to undermine her foundations in their violation of law. This is ultimately what Barack Obama is proposing.

It is now Congress' job to impeach the man, regardless of who the Vice President is. Obama has long shown that he has not faithfully executed the office of the President nor has he defended the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That is largely due to the fact that he is a domestic enemy.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/11/ob...ez6u0H4JoRz.99




BLA BLA BLA ENFORCE THE LAWS WE HAVE IN PLACE, Impeach this liar...

#NewYorkPost

BAMNESTY! NY POST LAMPOONS OBAMA AS STATUE OF LIBERTY Must Read....Be sure to RT

http://ow.ly/EFM1K



Bamnesty! NY Post lampoons Obama as Statue of Liberty | GOP The Daily Dose


The wood — tabloid speak for front page — screams: Bamnesty — Bring me your tired, your poor…heck anybody!

The pages of The Post reveal a paper less than thrilled with Obama’s immigration declaration: “Americans have been treated to another Obama speech.

“And no one thinks to ask the obvious question his record on immigration raises: Apart from the parts designed to goad Republicans, does this president believe one word of what he’s telling us?”

Cross-town rival New York Daily News, which takes itself more seriously and is less cheeky, left Obama off the front page, choosing instead to jump on the chaos enveloping Bill Cosby.

Both Gotham tabs have taken to calling Mr. Obama “Bam” in headlines.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz3JiQSX8ZZ


This is getting to be what we always see of this illegal President...

President Obama has just committed his most blatant, impeachable offense and David Knight breaks it all down on this Friday, November 21 edition of the Alex Jones Show. Obama completely bypassed Congress and announced amnesty for millions of "anchor baby" parents and illegal immigrant children - as long as they've been in the country for five years. The Constitution, however, reveals he lacks the authority to pick and choose which to deport. His order will grant illegals social security numbers, work permits, and government-issued IDs, and many of these illegals will be able to obtain green cards, which allows them to sponsor their relatives to join them in the U.S. Tune in live 11am-2pm cst

bit.ly/FreeVideoStream





Today on the Alex Jones show:

On the Thursday, November 20 transmission of Infowars Live, guest hosts David Knight and Paul Joseph Watson walk us through the latest on Obama's promise to unilaterally pass an executive order legalizing millions of illegal immigrants, a plan which one US senator warns could lead to anarchy and violence. We'll also get on-the-ground updates from reporters Joe Biggs and Jakari Jackson regarding the situation in Ferguson, Mo., where demonstrators are anticipating a controversial grand jury decision... which could also lead to anarchy and violence. On today's show, Infowars invites Love Thy Neighbor founder Arnold Abbott to discuss why his organization continues feeding the homeless, despite multiple police citations ordering them not to. Health guru Anthony Gucciardi also joins the show to explore the possibility that an ebola crisis may be concealed from the public. We'll also take your calls on this global broadcast.


http://www.infowars.com/watch-alex-jones-show/

Apocalypto: Kagan, Bar The Door



Written by Donald Joy on November 21, 2014

Just how much will patriotic American citizens take? Millions of conservatives are expressing utter disgust and anger at this latest criminal act by an alien Oval Office occupier intent on transforming our country into a land more closely resembling the ritual mass-beheading scenes from Mel Gibson’s film Apocalypto than the one we grew up in. Obama flouts the Constitution and sneers at the American people with his announcement of unlegislated de facto amnesty for millions of La Raza’s Aztlan Reconquistadors, and he dares anyone to stop him.

We’ve seen the numerous video clips from recent years showing Obama himself repeatedly describing, in his own clear and unmistakable words, such unilateral presidential action as being illegal; the plainly unconstitutional abuse of power. The videos have been played and replayed on TV and everywhere else — not that blatant evidence of wrongdoing has ever mattered to him or to most in his party.

Democrats are lying when they defiantly claim that previous presidents of both parties have done the same thing Obama has just done. Past presidents merely used executive orders only to modify and augment pieces of properly passed immigration legislation which had been debated and voted on by the United States Congress. By cooperating with a willing Congress, they acted in accordance with the will of the people as expressed through our elected representatives.

As a bitterly wounded and even more spiteful (than he was already) lame duck following what amounted to an electoral holocaust for his policies and his party, Obama’s pathologically narcissistic personality now refuses to go through the legal process at all. Instead of working with Congress to create, sign, enact, and/or augment new immigration legislation (which isn’t needed anyway; what is and has always been needed is the long-neglected simple enforcement of existing laws), he thinks he can thumb his nose at us and just make his own rules, in direct violation of the law, and maybe even get away with it.

Can he?

Many outraged patriots are talking about rising up en masse against Obama’s tyrannical regime and stopping it by force, if the Republican leaders we just resoundingly elected to stop him by more polite formal means fail to do so. Yes, there are rumors of civil war.

Republicans in the House of Representatives should first sue the Obama administration to seek a judicial ruling and remedy against Obama’s usurpations. To their credit, they are doing so once more where Obamacare is concerned, and appear likely to succeed this time — however, John Boehner has so far declined to include Obama’s executive amnesty overreach as part of that lawsuit. Obviously, it is imperative that this be done, immediately, and it is imperative that the Supreme Court save us from the impending jeopardy of widespread civil unrest and even violence by countervailing against Obama’s attempt at flagrant despotism.

We need an emergency injunction against Obama from the black-robed branch of the federal government — the balancers of power who, after all, have sworn to slam the brakes on all such wild, reckless abuses of the Executive. Even the most liberal of the Justices must see that Obama is not merely supplementing existing law with his amnesty declaration. He is, for the umpteenth time throughout his administration, displaying open contempt for the idea of operating within any passed law.

Whether this scofflaw foreigner Obama will actually comply with a SCOTUS ruling against this dictatorial decree of administrative amnesty for millions of illegal invaders remains to be seen. If not, impeachment and removal from office must take place. Barring that happening, all bets are off.

Lock and load.

http://clashdaily.com/2014/11/apocal...agan-bar-door/

Harry and Obama sitting on a fence..Harry for 2016...Wake Up America....Obamanation is an obomanation!!!!.