This thread calls for a CWII Ping...So, here it is.
Posted on 06/15/2012 7:50:51 PM PDT by smoothsailing
June 15, 2012
Victor Davis Hanson
Legally, President Obama has reiterated the principle that he can pick and choose which U.S. laws he wishes to enforce (see his decision to reverse the order of the Chrysler creditors, his decision not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and his administration’s contempt for national-security confidentiality and Senate and House subpoenas to the attorney general). If one individual can decide to exempt nearly a million residents from the law — when he most certainly could not get the law amended or repealed through proper legislative or judicial action — then what can he not do? Obama is turning out to be the most subversive chief executive in terms of eroding U.S. law since Richard Nixon.
Politically, Obama calculates that some polls showing the current likely Hispanic support for him in the high 50s or low 60s would not provide enough of a margin in critical states such as Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado, or perhaps also in Florida and Virginia, to counteract the growing slippage of the independent vote and the energy of the clinger/tea-party activists. Thus, what was not legal or advisable in 2009, 2010, or 2011, suddenly has become critical in mid-2012. No doubt free green cards will quickly lead to citizenship and a million new voters. Will it work politically? Obama must assume lots of things: that all Hispanics vote as a block in favoring exempting more illegal aliens from the law, and are without worry that the high unemployment rate hits their community among the hardest; that black voters, stung by his gay-marriage stance, will not resent what may be seen as de facto amnesty, possibly endangering his tiny (and slipping) lead in places like Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. And because polls show overwhelming resistance to non-enforcement of immigration law, Obama also figures that the minority who supports his recent action does so far more vehemently than the majority who opposes it. Time will tell; but my gut feeling is that his brazen act will enrage far more than it will delight — and for a variety of different reasons. As with all his special-interest efforts — the Keystone cancellation, war-on-women ploy, gay-marriage turnabout, and now de facto amnesty — Obama believes dividing Americans along class, ethnic, gender, and cultural lines will result in a cobbled together majority, far more preferable than a 1996 Clinton-like effort to win over the independents by forging a bipartisan consensus.
Economically, why would we formalize nearly a million new legally authorized workers when unemployment is approaching its 41st consecutive month over 8 percent — especially when Democrats used to label 5.4 percent unemployment as a “jobless recovery”? Here in California, the slowing of illegal immigration, due mostly to the fence and tough times, has led to steep wage hikes for entry-level and farm labor, and given a little more clout to Americans in so-called unskilled-labor fields. In other words, it really is true that the real beneficiaries of border enforcement are low-paid Hispanic-Americans and African-Americans who become more valued when they are not competing with virtually unlimited numbers of illegal-alien workers.
When you collate this recent act with the class-warfare rhetoric, the “punish our enemies” threats, the president’s and Eric Holder’s serial racialist statements, the huge borrowing, the national-security leaks, the takeover of health care, the push for redistributive taxes, and even the trivial appointments like a Van Jones, Anita Dunn, or Armendariz, you can fairly conclude that Obama most certainly did not like the way the United States operated for the last 30 or so years, and has tried his best, through hook or crook, to change America in ways that simply were not possible through legislative or even judicial action. Give the president credit. He has thrown down the gauntlet and essentially boasted: This is my vision of the way the new America should work — and if you don’t like it, try stopping me in November, if you dare.
Liberal j*ck*ass...
Awaken the sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve...........
Don’t Tread on Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MHUyFxgUDc&feature=plcp
If a person operates in contempt and willful violation of the law, does said person deserve the protection of the law?
Absolutely, and though the phrase was coined by teenagers it was right on the mark. It was coined before the days of PC and the family upbringing was probably the reason for the insight of young people across the country, they tended to know right from wrong.
Sadly, the turkey in the WH wasn't afforded the privilege of that insight and much more sad is the fact this impostor was elected president.
Signed up today I see. Welcome to Free Republic.
Liberty will reign.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2FAAVPX-jg
Declaration of Independence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljefCAWuaMQ
The American Revolution coming back?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wjfrexe61XI
I don’t know about “revolutionary” times, but the country sure seems to be entering some kind of “end” times. From the fiscal insanity of trillion-dollar deficits to the social insanity of forcing the military to celebrate sodomy, to just today’s news of Obama taking dictatorial powers, the downward spiral appears to be accelerating. Looks like we’re getting a front-row seat to the disintegration, and even the prospect of an upcoming election seems to offer no optimism to grasp onto, considering the liberal, big-government candidate the GOP has managed to serve up.
Bingo.
Justice Story declared in his "Commentaries on the Constitution . . ." that "the People" are the only Keepers of the Constitution, and if they do not retain that right, but allow a President to flout its provisions and act in violation of its limitations, then freedom will be lost.
This President seems irritated that the Constitution does not allow him to take arbitrary actions to impose policies he believes in. Republicans need to be grounded enough in Constitutional principles to defend the Constitution they swore to uphold, and bold enough to challenge assaults upon those principles.
"Until the people have, by some solemn and authoritative act, annulled or changed the established form, it is binding upon them collectively, as well as individually; and no presumption or even knowledge of their sentiments, can warrant their representatives [the executive, judiciary, or legislature]; in a departure from it prior to such an act." - Alexander Hamilton
In the first of the eighty-five "Federalist Papers," Alexander Hamilton emphasized that:
"... it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection or choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force."
The nutballs always seem to be the leftists. Conservatives
may gripe, but they almost always stay within the system to
try to change things. Without exception the people who would act on or
promote illegal and violent means to change government are
either leftists or just kooks who have no political identity.
Well stated!
Let me see if I have this straight. Odummer’s decree covers all of those under 30 years of age. (Oh but, it’s for the chiiiiiiildren.) Of course, they will only retain the right to reside and work here. but not to citizenship, so they won’t be able to vote. And of course, our tough voting requirements will ensure they can’t even vo… wait a minute. Isn’t Eric Holder suing states who attempt to enact a Voter ID system, and who are cleansing their voter rolls of people who are not eligible to vote??
Go ahead and tell this isn’t by design. Go ahead and try to explain to me how this isn’t a blatant attempt by the left to overthrow rule of law.
And I’ll call you a liar.
You’ve nailed it. He lacks honor, he is a dishonorable man.
Wise men should consider well before cutting the ties of the existing rule of law.
But, wise men also must realize that there are times in human history when there are no other options to the use of force.
The US was not created over a negotiating table.
That said, a person who chooses a course past reason, should also chose carefully his moment and method of rebellion.
Thanks for posting those words of wisdom. It’s ultimately up to us, “We the People”.
“Are We in Revolutionary Times?”
It’s 1853 all over again...
Welcome, Old Yeller!
Exactly. It is time. Lets hope it is peaceful.
This thread calls for a CWII Ping...So, here it is.
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.