Committee Statement of Rangel Violations -PDF / Rangel shrine costs 6 million bucks?

Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
In the Matter of Charles B. Rangel
http://ethics.house.gov/Media/PDF/Rangel%20SAV.pdf

---

More than two years late/r Charles Rangel was finally charged with 13 violations of congressional ethics rules.

And, how do you define a Nancy Pelosi - clean up of a - "swamp"?

Well - there's a saying, "you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows" meaning : To understand what is happening in changing circumstances and to be able to anticipate the future.
So may I add here - you don't need to be a Congressman to know which way the vote goes...

Let's Make a Deal!!!

Isn't it strange that every one reports that at least one Republican, of the 10 member panel, would have to support any 'deal' to allow Charlie to rangel his way out of accountability for violating ethics and law. But it seems completely ignored that -that would mean that the 5 panel Democrat member votes are expected to act as Rangel's shield to any accountability.

All of us small-people who have to abide by laws, and suffer consequences of violating them, shall have to wait and see...



Remember now these folks aren't subject to the same laws they pass- like health care - and they don't lie- they mearly 'misspoke'.
As to ethics?? Well, it's just bad manners.

Imagine if these arrogant elites, under investigations, were not permitted to VOTE on the floor until they were cleared of ethics or corruption charges?
1) Charges wouldn't take 2 plus years to invegetate in limbo if their votes were needed...
2) Some of these recent laws shoved down our throats, by a vote or two, would never have passed.

[CBS News - By Sharyl Attkisson]

At the heart of the 13 counts is what critics have called Rangel's "monument to me," a presidential-library-like project called "The Rangel Center" at City College in New York. It was the subject of a CBS News investigation in 2007.

Rangel is charged with using public resources and Congressional letterhead to ask for big donations for the Rangel Center; that he solicited companies that had business before the tax committee he led at the time, including Goldman Sachs, Wachovia and dozens more; that he asked for $30 million from Verizon and New York Life, and $10 million from insurance giant AIG.

Rangel's attorneys responded that "The uncontroverted evidence is that Congressman Rangel never suggested that any donor to the Rangel Center would receive favorable consideration in legislative matters and never gave preferential treatment to any contributor."

In case we have forgotten, as new controversy erupts day after day from this Administration, Goldman Sachs and AIG has already received their "preferential treatment" and "consideration" in billions and billions in bailout funds.

Time to pay some of the slush fund consideration back to grantors?

Wouldn't it be unique if the Obama Government, who has stepped in to take over, manage, fire, and set pay scale boundaries for anyone who has excepted funds from "U.S. Taxpayers", also made it illegal for any Company or entity that excepted those federal taxpayer funds to contribute dollars in any way to preferential special interest -> politicians?

Now that would be 'monumental'.

Obama wants your Mandatory Civilian Service - 5741: Universal National Service Act

5741: Universal National Service Act

111th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 5741

To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 15, 2010

Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

--for the rest of the required mandate

---

---

Every day the progressive take-over gets scarier and scarier.

Mandatory Involuntary Servitude? Required Slavery?
National Community Organizing Conscription? Democrat Indoctrination camps?

For a party that appears so often to be against war and military- actually inspiring draft dodgers of the 60's - what could be the principle, purpose and necessity behind this No-Choice Bill that gives the President his own private ownership of 2 years of your civilian life?

I've wondered about this necessity since Obama told us:" We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."..as our military.

Why?

Freedom and Choices are daily being wiped out people.

We must stop shrugging these control 'changes' off. Stand UP and be loud enough in protest on this that it never gets out of committee! Call your Congressmen today!!

KUHNER: President's Socialist Takeover Must Be Stopped

THE WASHINGTON TIMES
By Jeffrey T. Kuhner

President Obama has engaged in numerous high crimes and misdemeanors. The Democratic majority in Congress is in peril as Americans reject his agenda. Yet more must be done: Mr. Obama should be impeached.

He is slowly - piece by painful piece - erecting a socialist dictatorship. We are not there - yet. But he is putting America on that dangerous path. He is undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances; subverting democratic procedures and the rule of law; presiding over a corrupt, gangster regime; and assaulting the very pillars of traditional capitalism. Like Venezuela's leftist strongman, Hugo Chavez, Mr. Obama is bent on imposing a revolution from above - one that is polarizing America along racial, political and ideological lines. Mr. Obama is the most divisive president since Richard Nixon. His policies are Balkanizing the country. It's time for him to go.



story continued @ Washington Times here...

Come November remove all enablers of this enslavement-machine that is corrupting and replacing our Constitutional American Republic - Speak and Vote - while you still Can.

Charlie Rangel Angry: Where's My Journalist Protection?

Rangel admits the nojourna-list left-media isn't supposed to expose democrats.

NOTE: Warning CLIP MAY BE EDITED

Disclaimer: Portions of this tape- before or after may be missing - this could be construed to mean the Media wanted to show just this part for the reaction of Rangel to the reporter.



Ok- here's my softball interpretation - this is not about the reporter, ok? ready?


Luke Russert: Are you afraid you may lose your job?

Charlie: What kind of DUMB question is that? What news station are you from? (ah, well - that must explain it)

Russert: MSNBC

Charlie: HUH? Yer kidding me right? (What? No Fox? - you trying to make a name for yourself?)

Russert: Sir,

Charlie: Where the hell's my protection gone? Don't you know whose side you're on? You don't sound like our political arm. Disgraceful!

Russert: But, sir

Charlie: No respect. You should be ashamed! Son, you need to go back to your office and find out how to do your job.




...end of free interpretation...end paraphrase...end partial tape...wouldn't want to be sued.

In Defense of Andrew Breitbart: 'This Is Not About Shirley Sherrod'

by greybeard

Andrew Breitbart made it clear when interviewed on Tuesday that 'This Is Not About Shirley Sherrod'.

No one listened.

It is the Media today that made the taped issue "all about Sherrod".

That Sherrod was retelling a story that would eventually form in some epiphany of racial growth for Sherrod - advancing her personal philosophical change to one of a born again Marxist serving the haveNots over the haves - was not the purpose of the CLIPS; and the story's culmination of some sort of maturity of racial 'growth change'... certainly was not known by the audience in the clip as she told it.

From the reactions of everyone from the Media to the White House - Sherrod's words as she spoke sounded like 'get back time' discriminatory racism. Otherwise they would not have pulled her over to the side of road, asked for her ID, and purged her. Their own over reaction made it about Shirley.

But in this instance Brieitbart has told us that the context for the clip (SENT to him as a Clip) was not to show portions of Sherrod appearing to be racist.
He already explained that the issue was not about Sherrod herself.
It wasn't about whether her story was of 26 years ago or tomorrow...as it will be.

The story & the clip was to show the NAACP crowd approving of what they were hearing because as they listened they too were at that portion of the story clip that came across as racist.
In content and context - They laughed.

That was the story- not who the speaker was.

VERY FEW people put entire tapes on their sites. News programs play clipped "soundbites" all the time. Newspapers with websites post relevant CLIPS in conjunction with their storyline.
Clips are nothing new.

The people going beyond a 'context' argument and ranting about a "doctored" tape are themselves the actual distributors of distortion in spreading the allusion that the tape was phony in some way.

The portion of a tape that is pertinent, to whatever "the point" is that is trying to be made, has always been used in this way.

So no matter how one sliced, diced, edited, or clipped it "6 ways to Sunday" - the point in the tape was not taken out of context by Breitbart, even if there was miles more of it to hear, since the reported Breitbart focus was the NAACP laughing at what appeared to be the power over a white farmer needing help from Sherrod... and just how much help she would decide to give him by directing the farmer to 'one of his own kind'.

The reaction was the point. The reaction was the story.

If the "context" focus had been instead on what Sherrod says hurts, at her present job, is in writing millions of dollars of checks to white business, or 'guess what'...black land with a creek on it is going to a white man - we might have to ask why is race an issue in the Agriculture Department - but it wasn't even brought up.

Racist - not racist- content of character - tip of iceberg- you decide.

If the "due diligence" Breitbart accusers are listening - 'This was Not (supposed to be) About Shirley Sherrod'; but others made it so.

The Sherrod clip was to show an example of the "elements" of hypocrisy in the house of the NAACP "crowds" and their condemnation labeling claims of Tea Party crowds as racists. [Actual example of Left Media content doctored video here -- infiltration manufactured "elements"-- and non-existent --claims might I add]

As everyone scrambles to make amends because they say they didn't listen to the whole tape,and now apologies and offers of recompense go out, (while trying to refocuse blame on Breitbart)I have to wonder how anyone listened to whole tape and didn't hear "it is a white and black thing" for Sherrod.

But THAT is a different story.

If there is a 'teachable moment' in all of this then perhaps the NAACP, and others, will re-evaluate their own slice n dice of crowds to seek out n find that ONE nitwit who stands out improperly so they can label an entire group.

So long as race-baiting politics is a tool of division I won't be holding my breath.

Meanwhile- a very important thing that happened this week during this race distraction circus was Obama's control of people and business in a 2300 page transformation of our 'free market' Republic.
We just moved one step closer to a socialist dictatorship with Obama's financial 'reform' take over of our independence.
If not repealed then soon we will all equally have not - and government will be the Haves.

Daily Caller: Excerpts from JournoList journalists - Shut Down FOX News

A few excerpts from JournoList journalists
By The Daily Caller | Published: 1:29 AM 07/21/2010 | Updated: 2:19 AM 07/21/2010

Jonathan Zasloff – UCLA law professor



read more @: The Daily Caller - Liberal journalists: Shut Down Fox News

"FOX is Not a News Organization" ... now where have we heard that before??

Oh, that's right we saw an effort by the Obama crew to BAN FOX NEWS using that attack back in October. It failed when Obama assumed his media droolers would fall in line and didn't.

One thing we know is Obama will push n push n push until Bama gets what Bama wants.
Could some of these nojournalists be Obama-inkshirts nudging others to fall in line, to support the Obama kill the Fox voice, so that the White House can try-try again?

NAACP to Condemn Black Panther Party as racist...

NOT!

Apparently the NAACP is gathered today to vote on a resolution labeling assembly protest as a deterrent to progress.

The NAACP, who has long lost legitimacy through its racist rhetoric, has decided to step up a manufactured race divide aimed at Americans gathered at Tea Party rallies and condemn them as 'racists' and a threat to democracy.

NAACP members feel that the "Tea party could evolve and become more dangerous"....

No mention as of yet about the New kill-white-babies Black Panthers Party's agenda whose group may evolve and become more dangerous...

Where is any evidence of Tea Party "elements" being dangerous or racists?

Months and Months have passed since Andrew Breitbart has offered a 100,000 reward for anyone with proof that anyone was deliberately spat on or the N-word was yelled at a congressman at a tea party rally.
No one has come forward with proof. Not even from the police officer who was standing right next to the escorted accuser.

This isolated unproven single incident allows for a completely segregated organization to label the Tea party people as racists?

Ironic.

The Tea Party not only has participants of all political ideology represented and present, but the crowds & speakers at rallies are of all diverse ethnic peoples.
They are not there because they are black or white or red or green. They are there as fed up Americans who have a pretty clear 'message' to - Roll Back Big Government - Reform Spending Spree - Constitutional Governance - Stay out of Health & other personal liberty Choices - Deregulate the foot on the throat of business - & Taxed Enough Already.

How is any of that message racist?

It is the NAACP who refer to any black Tea Party people as "Uncle Tom's."..Or was that incident isolated?

How about the SEIU thugs beating up a black Tea party participant? A collective salvation lesson for the individual?

...the Department of Justice preferential race policies...signaling uncivil hate groups a wink and a nod amnesty.

America as we know it is in trouble- stay home and ignore it or get out and protest.

It increasingly becomes harder to write about these backward-advancing race card dealers without taking sides in the debate and becoming a part of this engineered division.

Trying to write anything to penetrate and reconnect that liberal logic disconnect with actual examples falls on brainwashed synapses.

If you try to point out why they are incorrect- you are a racist. So don't try to point it out. Run awaaaaaay.

If Obama writes that he prefers the company of radicals and his Marxist professors and he begins filling Government positions with Marxists, Maoists, Communists, anti-capitalists, one world governance radicals, racists, eugenicists, and people who do not believe in our constitution and you dare to carry a sign proclaiming Obama as a socialist/Marxist/ - then yer a whacko racist.

If you point out that illegal trespassing occupiers are costing billions and economically bankrupting states and that you support States Sovereign right to enforce LAWS and protect itself - then you are a racist - so don't say a word in protest.

Doesn't matter if the crowds are diverse...If you carry a poster protesting out of control big government you are a pro-constitution anti-government extremist added to the FBI description of a white domestic terrorist.

If a man exposes Obama's Green Jobs Czar as a communist racist then the advertising punishing boycotts start because dang if he... isn't a racist.

If you are against the government being in control of cradle to death socialized medical rationing ( whose track record has bankrupted Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, the Post Office, our Mortgage equity, and everything else they interfere with) then YEP - you're a racist.

Why would anyone have a sign comparing what is happening in our country - as Obama uses Stimulus dollars to fund criminal organizations, establishes communication censorship, builds an Americorps security force, requires mandatory servitude, and takes over Banks, Car companies, Media, Newspapers, Internet, Education, Health care, Wall Street, integrating State n Religion with promises of 'social justice' tything, while pushing a "necessary skyrocketing" Energy Tax scam, overseen by installed anti-American, one world order, regulating czars - with socialist/Leninist/fascist images??

Goodness! It just doesn't make sense to protest any of this unless - you're a racist.

I really hate to use the tired argument of 'where were you during the BUSH'- this or that - years used by the left hypocritical guardians of hate speech ... but where were any of these people's complaints when people gathered with lynching-death-Nazi-Bush-signs?





Oh- that's right - the professional victims complaining are the ones carrying the signs.


The Tea Party is accused of using “racial epithets?”

Totally untrue. When? Where? Show it.

This is a leftist tactic being used to censor dissent.

The reality is that Tea Party participants are not racists.
They are terribly concerned that this country is being transformed into something that America is not through this Obama UNconstitutional Administration of Marxist take over.

Protests have nothing whatsoever to do with the color of a mans skin. These same people put the man in Office. It is all about what is in Obama's post-exposed character and policies.

Mr. Uniter - Pelosi- the NAACP - the Progressive Caucus - Democrat enablers - are now inciting a pre-election demographic, inflaming, regressive, division that is absolutely despicable.

This Admins continued War with Americans to bring about Obama's formula of changes, while using untrue race accusations, could set us back by decades but still they push the illusion because for progressives the 'ends justify the means'.

And, as Alinsky power rules taught Obama - keep the people bitter and rub the sores raw.

"We will Not Be Silenced" - Obama's Legion of Thugs -How the U.S. was Won

The recent reveal of the DOJ protecting the Black Panther Party thuggery at the polls is Not an isolated incident.
The stories of intimidation, threats, fraud, falsified delegate counts, falsified documents, destruction of property, and physical attacks has been documented since the primaries in 2008.

The 2008 blogosphere is filled with the damning information of how Obama's crews strong armed their way through precincts and terrorized voters and stole caucuses.

Blogtalk radio stations sprang up overnight, writers set their keyboards on alert, chat rooms and forums blazed a trail of investigation and reporting...but the peoples concerns and efforts were silenced because all of the government referees blocked standing, redress, and accountability, while the Media was on a "truth be told" time out.

I have a story written up here by Lynette Long about super delegate investigations - but my log account suggests of the 62,000 visitors here - not one person has ever read it. Meaning, under obstructionist News black outs, that unless one comes up with some correct keywords while searching, information stays buried and people stay uninformed.

The documentary "We will not be Silenced" has been around for 2 years. Have you heard of it? Read about it? Seen it?

Probably not- because the Media didn't report on it even though the information was passed to them.

The 'selected not elected' mob has never been made to answer for any of the disenfranchised voters complaints.

You can bet Obama's Department of InJustice has not, or will not, investigate any of the illegal activities we saw being reported in the blog pages of 2008 and in the videos below. Especially in light of the new Socialist party discriminatory policies in the DOJ that has been revealed by, X-DOJ Attorney, Christian Adams.

Today Fox News (finally) interviewed a Gigi Gaston who has directed this damning documentary "We will not be Silenced".


Hopefully Fox will bring us more of these peoples stories in the coming days.

Part 1-


You can view the videos in all of their 5 parts here.

This is not about sour grapes Hillary supporters. This is about the absolute contempt for the people, the corrupt DNC practices, and Obama thug organizers who would do whatever it takes to remove a persons right to one vote and install their chosen.

And if they did it before, and got away with it, they will do it again. And again.
 
 
 

5th Circuit rejects White House drilling ban Appeal: Obama CAN be Overturned

A U.S. appeals court today rejected Obama’s appeal to put a hold on a ruling that lifted a moratorium on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

Thanks to judicial review we have an Obama 'control' battle in the win column for the gulf states...and a 'hope' that more of the Obama socialism gears can be stopped.

A shame we can't get some of these stand up judges to look at some of Obama's other legal issues.

 
 

---

Michelle Malkin:Another ass-kicking

HealthCare Rationing: Obstruction not Allowed for the Democratic Cause

Obama waited until lawmakers went home on vacation to approve, by a vote of ONE-0, his pick for Medicare and Medicaid Rationing Czar.

                 Donald Berwick:  To your Collective Health!


Donald Berwick's philosophy is on record in favor of rationing of health care.
..."any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional.”
"The decision is not whether or not we will ration care", says Berwick, "the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing it blindly."

Obama says he had to sneak Donald through the socialist backdoor because Republicans were obstructing his appointments and he would not allow a few to obstruct his changes - because he knows what is right for America for the many.

Republicans, however, have reported that they tried for weeks to get Obama to bring Donald Berwick forward, so they could expose Berwick's rationing-redistribution of health and wealth ideology.
Instead Obama waited...and waited...and waited...knowing the recess was coming and he could then install Berwick, without Senate confirmation hearings, thereby bypassing exposure of Berwick's socialist views - while also Not exposing those who would have to defend Berwick and vote for him publicly.

Not that most of the Media would have informed you anyway.

You know - because we are told, information is a distraction...and, we have to pass it before we know what's in it...



There are only a few ways introduced to reduce costs in Healthcare that doesn't involve reducing lawyers fees:
1)competition which has been rejected.
2)mandatory participation of the healthy non-users dollars 'spreading' those funds to cover the cost of the costly.
3)efficient-rationed care to the actual costly users.

Two out of three ain't bad- right?

People are just Not listening:
I want to remind anyone reading this (that disagrees ) of one of Obama's statements that has people carrying signs and trying to warn you of what is to come for your 'post-existing' conditions:
Obama on brokering treatment options: "There is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place... The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health- care bill out here."

Yet anyone with a "Save Grandma" sign is ridiculed and called a whack job?

Blind, fool, or needing a tax dictionary, to describe what IS is, Obama wants to have a required cost effective democratic conversation with you, or yours, and the billing burden of actually providing ANY health care when you'll need it most.

The Stimulus Bill has already provided the funds and staffed the democratic distributive jury that will decide whether you fit inside Obam's 80% bracket.

If you can't figure out what That above end of life Obama statement means without reading or understanding a single line of these ration-controlled health Czar manifestos then get ready to go home, shut up, and take your pill.
 

Quotes from Ezekiel Emanuel, Obama's Health Policy Czar:
"Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change...When the worst-off can benefit only slightly while better-off people could benefit greatly, allocating to the better-off is often justifiable."

...and less expensive.

What Obama has set you up for; Again from his Health Policy Czar:

"Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years."
-Lancet, Vol 373 June 31, 2009

"Strict youngest-first allocation directs scarce resources predominantly to infants. This approach seems incorrect. The death of a 20-year-old woman is intuitively worse than that of a 2-month-old girl, even though the baby has had less life. The 20-year-old has a much more developed personality than the infant, and has drawn upon the investment of others to begin as-yet-unfulfilled projects....
-Lancet, Vol 373, January 31, 2009 425,

and...although life-years are equally valuable to all, justice requires the fair distribution of them...poor adolescents should be treated the same as wealthy ones, even though they may have received less investment owing to social injustice.

This guy sits on the Obama Board that determines your, and your families, well being.
He will be crafting, implementing and imposing priority policy for your future forced insurance coverage.

Cost Effectiveness and preferential Minority panels are already set up and funded by the communist and terrorist authors of the Apollo Stimulus Bill.
The bureaucratic claims clerks are replacing the insurance adjusters.
Government will have direct access to your personal bank account for withdrawals, the collection agency will be the IRS, and the 'distributive justice' rationing eugenicists judges are being seated.
There is nothing new here in reforming the hated insurance practices except a newly formed unmitigated non-recoursed Master.

If you are to young to vote, to old to pay income taxes, or within the burdensome 80% end of life medical funds drain, then a Dr. Berwick redistributive allocator is Obama's fair-share justice-administrating reform answer for the flushing out of any non productive, chronic, economic investment wastes.

Berwick joins the rank-ranks of Obama's legion of radical transformational Czars, most of whom were never confirmed, who will destroy this country's freedom and sanity as we knew it.

The more obstruction the better for America in my opinion- Reveal Remove & Repeal in 2010!

The wake up call awaiting all of those still sitting on their expected 'free health care' wall, is all the king's horses and all the king's men --- obscuring and avoiding 'that very difficult democratic conversation'...scheduled for sometime after 2013.
 
 

---

"To provide a high quality of life for all, there must be fewer people."- Obama's Science & Technology Czar - John Holdren

DOJ Files the ReConnect in November Lawsuit: Arizona Bunkers Down

So let us pretend that Arizona is Philadelphia, and the border is entrance to a polling building, and law enforcement is a Black Panther wielding a night stick wanting to kill cracker babies....well hell, this Department Of Justice would never have even brought this case to court at all then.

Obama and crew have for months made this immigration problem a "racial issue" rather than an economic, security, and enforcement of law issue.

The democrats are up in arms declaring Arizona's right to protect itself is a controversial law that 'could lead to' racial profiling.


Ironic after months of Obama stirring up race discord with walking the dawg - ice cream parlor- show me your papers horror scenarios, and burning the midnight oil to find some chink in the Arizona statue, that when the DOJ filed their lawsuit (pdf) today there was no mention of potential Unconstitutional 'racial profiling' in it other than to refer to an amendment that was added to the original S.B. 1070 law to clarify to those who had -"expressed fears that the original law would somehow allow or lead to racial profiling."

The lawsuit does not go on to declare that it would.

Perhaps, despite months of creating or saving 11 million potential votes, the accused corrupt & racial preferential DOJ could not point to an area in the Arizona law that would actually produce the controversial hysteria promoted by the Obama shout outs.

Although the suit describes nicely what the various functions of the federal government (and its Agencies) are supposed to be -- its operation sadly lacks the track record that it has performed those functions listed -that it feels Arizona's law would be interfering with.

I have read the Arizona Law and the Federal lawsuit (unlike some of those who wanted it filed) and although I am not versed in LAW - it appears that the DOJ suit is quite disingenuous where it claims the word use of - "require", "MUST", and "mandatory" when describing its application and objections.

The Arizona law gives MORE civil rights protections in it than the Federal law does and the Arizona law was carefully crafted to not pre-empt federal law.

The principle that protects the Arizona law is the legal principle of concurrent enforcement. This has been recognized by several courts, including the 9th Circuit. It holds that a law is not conflict-preempted if the state law prohibits the same behavior that is already prohibited by federal law. Similarly, if a state officer acts in a way to assist the federal government in that action, he concurrently enforces what is already prohibited under federal law.

The state statue literally refers to those federal statutes. A person can only be guilty under the state statute if he is guilty under the federal statute.

The reported 11-20 million illegal trespassers certainly points to the fact that the borders are NOT secure and the federal government has NOT done an adequate job of doing their job- alone.

If the 'kick the can down the road' federal government had done one of their primary jobs of border enforcement protection then States like Arizona would never have had to even pass a secure our border law.

It is reported that 58% of Americans approve of Arizona's Inherit & Sovereign Authority to protect its land and citizens- and in so doing securing the rest of America and all citizens too. Yet Obama is calling on national legislation to prevent other states from following suit.

The lawsuit states an objection to what it calls a "patchwork" of immigration policies: The Constitution and the federal immigration laws do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country.

¿ Where have they been? State after State has its own written immigration laws - including California.
Certainly the federal government fails in this argument when it hasn't done a thing at all to pounce on any illegal sanctuary-city 'patchwork' policies that are providing a safe haven for alien law breakers "throughout the country".

Should they win using this "patchwork" argument will the feds prosecute illegal sanctuary cities or continue with selective political enforcement policies?

Arizona has declared it has had enough of non performance entitlement and is at the fountainhead of actually performing application and enforcement of law which threatens the Federal powers collective. Such individualism of State cannot be permitted nor spread.

Are there other reasons to explain why the DOJ has filed a suit attacking a State who has done nothing more than mirror a federal law to protect our land and citizens from unlawful invasion and continued economic disaster?
Could it be because under Obama's social leftist appointees the DOJ is now a political arm of Obama's get out the Latino vote-surge for November?

Don't forget that Mr. Uniter plays the national division card whenever he gets into any power to persuade trouble.
Remember back in April when Obama said his under siege transformation of America needed forward progress help and to 'reconnect' he called for "young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women who powered our victory in 2008 to stand together once again"...in the upcoming 2010 elections.

What? No lawn-chair seniors included?

This president could have worked with Arizona and all concerned states to secure our border and to douse the angry disingenuous flame spread about this Arizona Law but instead he chooses to carry a 'demographic' political torch.

Obama Blames Obstructionist Republicans for Failed Unemployment Extension

Lets take a look at the numbers.

	House	Senate
Democrats	255	56
Independents	0	2
Republicans	178	41
Vacancies	2	1

The Unemployment Extension bill failed by a vote of 261-155...it failed by 16 votes - it needed 277 to pass under the suspension of the rules.

As you can see in the House Image below - 8 Democrats did not vote - and 16 Democrats voted Nay - this was exactly the 16 needed votes to have passed this bill.



So, how is it possible that Republicans could be blamed for stopping this bill in its tracks?
With the Republican 30 votes the Democrats had the numbers to have PASSED it by 16-24 votes.




Instead unemployed Americans anger and anxiety is directed, by The Dem's, Pelosi, and Obama, at the Republicans, portraying that they killed people's extension hopes, while playing this political emotion game.

Pelosi said in a statement, “This is simply the latest example of Congressional Republicans putting partisan politics ahead of the public well-being.”

Sixteen Nays, Nancy. Where was the urgency of now arm twisting?

And Obama, who has told us that "information is a distraction," continues to use misinformation to polarize, agitate, divide, and distract.

What Obama didn't say while on his National disinformation soapbox, purposely scaring families, is there was a Republican Bill extending benefits until November - or that this Bill's passage was 16 votes short and that the 16 Democrats who voted NO killed this bill - and THAT the Dem's had plans already to bring this Bill to the floor again within days in which the Bill would face a much lower simple-majority 219-vote threshold.
“It will pass,” said Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) who added that he is coordinating with his counterparts in the Senate.

So why the Obama obstruction of truth with this paralyzing subterfuge? To blame the Republicans of course. Then to win one for 'the people' a few days later.

The extension- good or bad - as a pay as you go debt platform is a whole different story. This one is about manipulation of people's fear, being used as political pawns, and keeping people divided and angry.

How would you get exactly the 16 NO votes, short of passage, without tactical coordination?

---

The Bill did pass on Friday 7/2/10.