Showing posts with label White House. Show all posts
Showing posts with label White House. Show all posts

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Obama Weekly Address: This Labor Day, Lets Talk About the Budget, Saturday September 5, 2015

WASHINGTON, DC — In this week's address, the President recognized Labor Day by highlighting the economic progress our country has made, and underlining what needs to be done to continue that growth. Our businesses have created 13.1 million new jobs over the past five and a half years, the unemployment rate is the lowest it’s been in seven years, and seventeen states across the country have raised the minimum wage. The President stressed that to continue this progress, Congress needs to avoid a government shutdown that would hurt middle-class Americans and pass a responsible budget before the end of September. The President emphasized that Congress should not play games with our economy, and instead pass a budget that invests in our middle-class and helps those who work hard and play by the rules to get ahead.

Sunday, August 30, 2015


To support his insane interpretation of the post-Civil War amendments as granting citizenship to the kids of illegal aliens, Fox News' Bill O'Reilly is now taking job applications for the nonexistent -- but dearly hoped-for -- Jeb! administration, live, during his show. 

(Apparently my debate with O'Reilly will be conducted in my column, Twitter feed and current bestselling book, Adios, America, against the highest-rated show on cable news.) 

Republicans have been out of the White House for seven long years, and GOP lawyers are getting impatient. So now they're popping up on Fox News' airwaves, competing to see who can denounce Donald Trump with greater vitriol. 

Last Thursday's job applicants were longtime government lawyers John Yoo and David Rivkin. 

In response to O'Reilly's statement that "there is no question the Supreme Court decisions have upheld that portion of the 14th Amendment that says any person, any person born in the U.S.A. is entitled to citizenship ... for 150 years" -- Yoo concurred, claiming: "This has been the rule in American history since the founding of the republic." 

Yes, Americans fought at Valley Forge to ensure that any illegal alien who breaks into our country and drops a baby would have full citizenship for that child! Why, when Washington crossed the Delaware, he actually was taking Lupe, a Mexican illegal, to a birthing center in Trenton, N.J. 

If one were being a stickler, one might recall the two centuries during which the children of slaves were not deemed citizens despite being born here -- in fact, despite their parents, their grandparents and their great-grandparents being born here.

Incongruously, Yoo also said, "The text of the 14th Amendment is clear" about kids born to illegals being citizens. 

Wait a minute! Why did we need an amendment if that was already the law -- since "the founding of the republic"! 

An impartial observer might contest whether the amendment is "clear" on that. "Clear" would be: All persons born in the United States are citizens. 

What the amendment actually says is: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." 

The framers of the 14th Amendment weren't putting a secret trap door in the Constitution for fun. The "jurisdiction thereof" and "state wherein they reside" language means something. (Ironically, Yoo -- author of the Gitmo torture memo -- was demonstrating that if you torture the words of the Constitution, you can get them to say anything.

At least Rivkin didn't go back to "the founding of the republic." But he, too, claimed that the "original public meaning (of the 14th Amendment] which matters for those of us who are conservatives is clear": to grant citizenship to any kid whose illegal alien mother managed to evade Border Patrol agents. 

Whomever that was the “original public meaning” for, it sure wasn’t the Supreme Court. 

To the contrary, the cases in the first few decades following the adoption of the 14th Amendment leave the strong impression that it had something to do with freed slaves, and freed slaves alone: 

-- Supreme Court opinion in the Slaughterhouse cases (1873): 

"(N)o one can fail to be impressed with the one pervading purpose found in (the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments), lying at the foundation of each, and without which none of them would have been even suggested; we mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the newly-made freeman and citizen from the oppressions of those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over him." 

-- Supreme Court opinion in Ex Parte Virginia (1879): 

"[The 14th Amendment was] primarily designed to give freedom to persons of the African race, prevent their future enslavement, make them citizens, prevent discriminating State legislation against their rights as freemen, and secure to them the ballot." 

-- Supreme Court opinion in Strauder v. West Virginia (1880): 

"The 14th Amendment was framed and adopted ... to assure to the colored race the enjoyment of all the civil rights that, under the law, are enjoyed by white persons, and to give to that race the protection of the general government in that enjoyment whenever it should be denied by the States." 

-- Supreme Court opinion in Neal v. Delaware (1880) (majority opinion written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, who was the only dissenting vote in Plessy v. Ferguson): 

"The right secured to the colored man under the 14th Amendment and the civil rights laws is that he shall not be discriminated against solely on account of his race or color." 

-- Supreme Court opinion in Elk v. Wilkins (1884): 

"The main object of the opening sentence of the 14th Amendment was ... to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black, and whether formerly slaves or not, born or naturalized in the United States, and owing no allegiance to any alien power, should be citizens of the United States ... The evident meaning of (the words, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof") is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. ... Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterward, except by being naturalized ..." 

One has to leap forward 200 years from "the founding of the republic" to find the first claim that kids born to illegal immigrants are citizens: To wit, in dicta (irrelevant chitchat) by Justice William Brennan, slipped into the footnote of a 5-4 decision in 1982. 

So to be precise, what Yoo means by the "founding of the republic," and Rivkin means by "the original public meaning" of the 14th Amendment, is: "Brennan dicta from a 1982 opinion." 

Perhaps, if asked, the Supreme Court would discover a "constitutional" right for illegal aliens to sneak into the country, drop a baby, and win citizenship for the kid and welfare benefits for the whole family. (Seventy-one percent of illegal immigrant households with children are on government assistance.

But it is a fact that the citizenship of illegal alien kids has never been argued, briefed or ruled on by the Supreme Court. 

Yoo and Rivkin aren't stupid. It appears that the most significant part of their analysis was Yoo's legal opinion: "I don't think Trump is a Republican. I think actually he is ruining the Republican Party." Please hire me, Jeb!! (or Rubio)! 

O'Reilly could get more reliable constitutional analyses from Columba Bush than political lawyers dying to get back into government. 


Monday, August 24, 2015


President Obama returned from his Martha’s Vineyard vacation to Washington D.C. last night, only to wake up to negative headlines about the stock market crashing, partially in reaction to financial troubles in China.

But the president won’t be in the White House to see the market close. Later this afternoon he will board Air Force One for a trip to Las Vegas where he is expected to make a speech at the National Clean Energy Summit to promote his stiff regulatory policy on power plant emissions.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell more than 1,000 points after it opened this morning, suggesting another frightening close for markets at the end of the day.
Later this evening President Obama has scheduled a fundraiser for the Nevada State Democratic Party and Catherine Cortez Masto, the Democratic candidate hoping to replace retiring  Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)

Saturday, August 22, 2015

[EDITORIAL] Keystone pipeline delay insults taxpayers

For many Americans, the Keystone XL pipeline seems like an artifact from the last decade, like the death of Michael Jackson or Captain "Sully" Sullenberger landing a jetliner in the Hudson River. The pipeline, however, is still unfinished, still needing White House approval to cross the Canadian border.
Even more bizarrely, the southern half of the pipeline, running from Oklahoma to Port Arthur, has been completed. All it needs is tar sands oil from Canada to be fed into its northern half.
President Obama still claims he's just following normal procedures. But the political reality is that he doesn't want to approve the pipeline to placate his environmental supporters ... but he doesn't want to kill it either. So it remains in limbo and may stay that way until Obama leaves the White House.
By now the federal review of the pipeline has set some kind of dubious bureaucratic record. It has gone on for nearly seven years, more than five times the average for other pipeline applications. It's a good thing these people weren't in charge of World War II, or D-Day might still be on the drawing board.
Ironically, the current procedure that Obama is slow-walking was put in place by PresidentGeorge W. Bush to speed up these reviews.Robert McNally, an energy adviser to Bush, said approving a pipeline permit "was seen as the most routine, boring thing in the world."
The real victim in all this is the American people. The pipeline will bring more oil and thus lower gasoline prices to this country. If the Canadians can't sell their oil to us, they'll sell it to China. That will create more pollution and strengthen a key adversary.
Members of Congress have been demanding action, but the president has ignored them. He might listen if voters made it clear that there's a price for this dawdling. If nothing else, all current candidates for the presidency should state forcefully whether they will approve or disapprove this pipeline after all these years.

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Calling in the God squad [AL SHARPTON] to save the Iran deal

President Barack Obama, left, is greeted by Rev. Al Sharpton, right, before speaking at the National Action Network's Keepers of Dream Awards Gala in New York, Wednesday, April 6, 2011. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
The White House campaign to save the Iran nuclear deal is getting a boost from the God squad.

Faith-based groups, many of them increasingly nervous about the well-funded push by opponents of the deal, are intensifying their lobbying of lawmakers ahead of an important congressional vote on the agreement

Over the weekend, the Rev. Al Sharpton called on black churches to mobilize in support of the nuclear deal. On Monday, a group of 340 rabbis from multiple strands of Judaism released a letter, urging lawmakers to vote for the agreement. And plans are in the works for a coordinated rollout of endorsements by a number of religious groups next week, an organizer said.

The campaign is led largely by Catholic and Quaker groups, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Friends Committee on National Legislation, and it reflects many of the organizations’ traditional anti-war stances. It also comes as themes of anti-Semitism and Islamism have risen in the debate.

Some of the undecided lawmakers being targeted, among them prominent Democrats, have Jewish constituents and donors who fear the agreement will empower Iran, whose Islamist leaders are avowedly anti-Israel and have even questioned the Holocaust. (Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson recently suggested in much-criticized remarks that President Barack Obama was anti-Semitic for pursuing negotiations with Iran.)

The campaign against the deal is being led by groups such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Republican Jewish Coalition, and as much as $40 million or more is believed will be spent by the opposition on ads and other efforts, including sponsoring town halls to confront wobbly lawmakers.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, a Democrat from New York, is feeling pressure from every side but particularly from his Jewish constituents. He has attended two town halls in the past week, the first hosted by AIPAC and other groups which local news reports described as tense. During the second gathering, hosted by Jeffries himself, a woman in the crowd compared a former State Department official who spoke in favor of the deal to supporters of Adolf Hitler.

Monday, August 17, 2015

Maryland’s GOP Governor Larry Hogan: Conservative Getting Things Done

Defeating the political machine in one-party Democratic stronghold Maryland, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan went from nobody to overnight (and still going) sensation among conservatives across the country, especially for Republicans in a state where, aside from a Congressman here and there plus a celebrity governor, Republicans never fared well. With “Change Maryland”, his non-partisan interest group with bipartisan support,  Governor Hogan pushed tax and spending cuts, supported education, and killed expensive public projects.

A team player interested not just in furthering his career but helping his fellow Republicans, the son of a former Congressman has invested time and energy improving the Republican brand and increasing GOP outreach to otherwise unknown or untapped constituencies, particularly young voter and minorities. With Republicans nearing majority status in select counties, plus the growing weariness of voters taxed and regulated beyond reason, Hogan declared joyfully on the steps of the state house: “It’s a great day to be a Republican in Maryland”. With majority control over five of nine county executive boards, the new Governor is setting his sights on long-term growth and development for a state which barely survived eight years of uber-liberal Martin O’Malley.

Hogan has issued executive orders to require state officials and legislators to end the endless gerrymandering which marginalizes the most resolute of Old Line State residents. Despite the current push-back from the still Democratically dominated state legislature in Annapolis, Hogan is gaining prestige and strength. People want change, and Hogan is bringing it. One of his most recent and popular measures? Reducing the tolls and fees for Marylanders as well as visitors traversing the state.  Following the Baltimore riots, the governor exulted with national press that Baltimore would celebrate its world famous horse race. Residents stepped out to clean up and improve their city. The port of Baltimore is open for business, and bringing in major commerce with the largest shipping firm in the world.

Law and order has become the order of the day under the Hogan Administration, too. Recently, he has shown some muscle against illegal immigration, particularly in cases where a violent crime has occurred, despite the two-to-one Democratic voter registration in the state and previous Democratic Governor Martin O’Malley’s relentless policies to promote illegal aliens and transform them into “new Americans”.

Departing from the previous governor’s policy of non-cooperation, Hogan informed Marylanders that he would change the course of the state’s non-compliance legacy, comply with the federal government, and detain illegal aliens for Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

The Washington Post reports:
Immigration advocates in Maryland are criticizing a decision by Gov. Larry Hogan to notify federal immigration officials when an illegal immigrant targeted for deportation is released from the state-run Baltimore City Detention Center.

Advocates consider Hogan’s stance to be a departure from the policy of his predecessor, Democrat Martin O’Malley, who last year joined other elected officials in refusing requests from the Obama administration to coordinate with federal law enforcement whenever a detainee was being released.

With a latent political savvy determined not only to thwart amnesty proponents but coalesce widespread general support for his decision, Hogan’s office responded:

When pro-amnesty group CASA de Maryland protested outside Governor Hogan’s mansion, hisoffice released another statement:

The Baltimore City Detention Center is simply complying with a request from the Obama administration in regard to individuals who have already been detained. If CASA has concerns about Obama’s Priority Enforcement Program, I would recommend they take those concerns to the White House.

“Priority Enforcement” comes in light of President Obama’s executive amnesty in late November last year, when he announced to the United States that he would defer deportation and permit five million illegal aliens to remain in the country who had not broken any other laws.
What a supreme and gratifying irony: A Republican governor in a deep blue state is enforcing the law,, rounding up illegal aliens who endanger the public; an executive —whoa—enhances public safety all while rebuffing critics by referencing the President’s own unconstitutional order to expand immigration and benefits to illegal aliens. Even the “shrilly, shrilly liberal” Washington Post had to concede to the Republican governor’s “common sense” on immigration.

Following those bold measures, Governor Hogan took unprecedented action and shut down a corrupt, inefficient, and dysfunctional detention center in Baltimore City, too. Fiscal prudent and morally sound, Hogan practices fiscal discipline without sacrificing the safety and security of his citizens. Surviving and thriving in spite of non-Hodgkins lymphoma, the (once considered unlikely) conservative Republican Governor of Maryland has become the face of the growing conservative upswing sweeping the country, a nation fed up with government serving itself instead of taxpayers, hardworking men and women who just want a leader who will get things done.

With High-Profile Help, Obama Plots Life After Presidency

With High-Profile Help, Obama Plots Life After Presidency - The New York Times
WASHINGTON — The dinner in the private upstairs dining room of the White House went so late that Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn billionaire, finally suggested around midnight that President Obama might like to go to bed.
“Feel free to kick us out,” Mr. Hoffman recalled telling the president.
But Mr. Obama was just getting started. “I’ll kick you out when it’s time,” he replied. He then lingered with his wife, Michelle, and their 13 guests — among them the novelist Toni Morrison, the hedge fund manager Marc Lasry and the Silicon Valley venture capitalist John Doerr — well past 2 a.m.
Mr. Obama “seemed incredibly relaxed,” said another guest, the writer Malcolm Gladwell. He recalled how the group, which also included the actress Eva Longoria and Vinod Khosla, a founder of Sun Microsystems, tossed out ideas about what Mr. Obama should do after he leaves the White House.
“Where we’ll end up, I don’t know yet,” said Marty Nesbitt, the president’s longtime Chicago friend who is leading an extensive planning effort for Mr. Obama’s library and an anticipated global foundation.
Publicly, Mr. Obama betrays little urgency about his future. Privately, he is preparing for his postpresidency with the same fierce discipline and fund-raising ambition that characterized the 2008 campaign that got him to the White House.
The long-running dinner this past February is part of a methodical effort taking place inside and outside the White House as the president, first lady and a cadre of top aides map out a postpresidential infrastructure and endowment they estimate could cost as much as $1 billion. The president’s aides did not ask any of the guests for library contributions after the dinner, but a number of those at the table could be donors in the future.
The $1 billion — double what George W. Bush raised for his library and its various programs — would be used for what one adviser called a “digital-first” presidential library loaded with modern technologies, and to establish a foundation with a worldwide reach.
Supporters have urged Mr. Obama to avoid the mistake made by Bill Clinton, whose associates raised just enough money to build his library in Little Rock, Ark., forcing Mr. Clinton to pursue high-dollar donors for years to come. Including construction costs, Mr. Obama’s associates set a goal of raising at least $800 million — enough money, they say, to avoid never-ending fund-raising. One top adviser said that $800 million was a floor rather than a ceiling.
So far, Mr. Obama has raised just over $5.4 million from 12 donors, with gifts ranging from $100,000 to $1 million. Michael J. Sacks, a Chicago businessman, gave $666,666. Fred Eychaner, the founder of a Chicago television empire, donated $1 million. Mark T. Gallogly, a private equityexecutive, and James H. Simons, a technology entrepreneur, each contributed $340,000 to a foundation set up to oversee development of the library.
The real push for donations, foundation officials said, will come after Mr. Obama leaves the White House.
Via; New York Times
Continue Reading....

Sunday, August 16, 2015

Coulter: I Don’t Care If Donald Trump Performs Abortions in the White House

Conservative author Ann Coulter tweeted Sunday that Donald Trump’s immigration policy is so awesome, she doesn’t care if he performs abortions in the White House.
The tweet comes after Trump admitted in a Meet the Press interview that it’s possible he donated to Planned Parenthood in the past. Coulter has said that she believes abortion is murder.
She continued to praise Trump’s new policy paper, even comparing him to Ronald Reagan and his plan to the Magna Carta.
I don't care if wants to perform abortions in White House after this immigration policy paper.

Saturday, August 15, 2015

Obama Weekly Address: Continuing Work to Improve Community Policing Saturday August 15, 2015

WASHINGTON, DC — In this week's address, the President spoke about the work the Administration is doing to enhance trust between communities and law enforcement in the year since the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson.  In May, the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing released their final report setting out concrete proposals to build trust and enhance public safety.  And across America local leaders are working to put these ideas into action in their communities.  The President noted that while progress is being made, these issues go beyond policing, which is why the Administration is committed to achieving broader reforms to the criminal justice system and to making new investments in our children and their future. 

Friday, August 14, 2015

[VIDEO] MSNBC ‘Frustrated’ With Clinton for Messing Up Chance to ‘Make History’

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski, after a nearly 10-minute discussion on Morning Joe of Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton turning over her private email server, said Thursday she was “frustrated” with Clinton’s campaign for its numerous errors and potentially derailing the historic nature of her candidacy.

Brzezinski, who said earlier in the segment she would vote for Clinton if she won her party’s nomination, vented about Clinton’s aides protecting her from the press and trying to gloss over the email story earlier this year. Clinton’s server from her tenure at the State Department is now at the forefront of her campaign, with a federal investigation into its security, the revelations that top-secret emails were on it and her earlier acknowledgement that she wiped it clean of more than 30,000 emails.

“If you’re managing a campaign, you haven’t done a very good job helping put this behind Hillary Clinton,” Brzezinski said. “You just haven’t. Now the FBI’s involved.”

“There’s a very obvious answer to why they used a private email server,” said New York Times reporter Nick Confessore. “To keep their emails private. Everyone knows that. It’s obvious, so just say that. Acknowledge it. Instead of, ‘It’s for convenience.’ Not so convenient now, by the way.”

Brzezinski wrapped up the segment by admitting Clinton’s conduct was bothersome since it could keep a woman from capturing the White House.

“I’m frustrated by this,” she said.

“It’s very frustrating,” Huffington Post’s Sam Stein said, nodding.

“She could be an incredibly strong candidate,” she said, sighing. “She’s got the experience, could make history.
“I think you’re speaking for a lot of people who feel the same way,” Stein said.

Popular Posts