Smarter and prettier
Posted on 11/22/2014 6:31:53 PM PST by Javeth
Edited on 11/22/2014 7:25:23 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
A Crawford Ranch Production presents:
The Woman with the Golden Kneepads
Starring - Dana Perino
(Jeb’s her new leading man)
“What EO? Got a number?”
Please stop asking embarrassing questions that call for an answer.
Sincerely,
President Buckwheat AKA Lord of the Flies
/johnny
That eliminates the Republican Party.
No, Dana, it is not.
She is mostly posturing for a position in the Jeb Bush White House.
When did she become a lawyer ..??
I agree .. she needs to stay out of the conversation.
Yeah, she was all Arab-Springy, too. It was a great thing in her mind.
They discussed Joey, “they’re gonna put y’all back in chains” Biden this week on the Five. The consensus was that Biden is honest, authentic, and very likable.
They need drug-testing for these Talking Heads.
,
Will someone please explain to me-—what’s the payoff? What exactly does the GOPe gain by their spineless acquiescence to Obama and the liberal agenda? The Democrats and their allies ruthlessly march in lock step, rarely bend, never break, in pursuit of their goals. They are patient with long-term plans. Even after the shellacking they took on November 5, I’ve seen no indication that they are reassessing their assumptions, their philosophy, their agenda. Yet, before all the votes were even counted, the Republicans were making it clear they were going to cave on all the issues. What do they get out of continually surrendering to their enemies?
THIS person alleges to know more on this subject than Mark Levin. I think not. If it is true then there is no need for a Congress.
If Congress impeached obama and the senate convicted him, couldn’t he simply declare the ruling null and void and remain president. It seems consistent with what Perino says and what obama says. He has become the law. Plain and simple. I do not think this is what the Constitution states.
If Congress impeached obama and the senate convicted him, couldn’t he simply declare the ruling null and void and remain president. It seems consistent with what Perino says and what obama says. He has become the law. Plain and simple. I do not think this is what the Constitution states.
Yeah, but I’d rather look at her than look at Mark Levin...8^)
I think Dana is very attractive, looks like she could be in a Hitchcock film. With that said, I would love to see/hear Kimberly Guilfoyle or Jedediah Bila over her any day!
She is pleasant in her appearance. And she knows it.
There’s no accounting for taste. I don’t find Dana very superficially attractive, but more importantly, she’s got nothing going on in the upper story.
It’s not the first time. She’s another brainless Bushie.
”..., said that President Barack Obama's executive amnesty is well within the law."
Beware of cute, socialist-indoctrinated blondes like Ms Perino.
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
From a related thread …
With all due respect to mom & pop, since generations of parents have not been making sure that their children are being taught about the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers, we’re probably never going to hear misguided Fx News commentators like Ms Perino admit that the states have never delegated to Congress, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate immigration.
More specifically, regardless that PC interpretations of the Constitution’s Uniform Rule of Naturalization clause, Clause 4 of Section 8 of Article I, now wrongly blurr distinctions between immigration and naturalization, please consider the following.
Not only did Thomas Jefferson write that the states have never delegated to feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate immigration, such immigration a 10th Amendment-protected state power issue, but James Madison, regarded as the Father of the Constitution, had basically indicated the same thing.
As mentioned in related threads, here again is the relevant exerpt from Jefferson’s writings.
“4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the — day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force [emphasis added].” —Thomas Jefferson, Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 1798.
And here is the related excerpt from the writings of James Madison in Virginia Resolutions.
"That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the "Alien and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, ...…
… the General Assembly doth solemenly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people [emphasis added]. ”— James Madison, Draft of the Virginia Resolutions - December 1798.
So while the idea that Obama cannot pardon illegal immigrants without the legislative support of Congress is at least conceptually correct, it remains that Congress cannot legislatively address any aspect of intrastate immigration without the required consent of the Constitution’s Article V 3/4 state majority via an intrastate immigration amendment to the Constitution imo.
In fact, the Supreme Court has clarified in general that powers not delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the power to regulate intrastate immigration in this case, are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
So Obama cannot pardon anybody for breaking federal immigration laws because there are no constitutionally defensible intrastate-related federal immigration laws to break.
H O W E V E R …
I expect the powers to be to continue to emphasize the PC interpretations of various constitutional clauses to justify intrastate federal immigration policy because it remains that the 10th Amendment is probably the best kept secret in DC.
Smarter and prettier
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.