June 18, 2012 § 1 Comment
“In many ways, President Obama has fulfilled the dream of an imperial presidency that Richard Nixon strived for. On everything from [DOMA] to the gaming laws, this is a president who is now functioning as a super legislator. He is effectively negating parts of the criminal code because he disagrees with them. That does go beyond the pale.”
– Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law scholar at George Washington University Law School
This Jonathan Turley guy is no right-wing nut-job either. This is a guy who wanted Obama to prosecute folks in GWB’s White House for the alleged use of torture.
We don’t have kings in this country. If a president is not willing to recognize the separation of powers enumerated in the constitution then they should not serve.
June 16, 2012 § Leave a Comment
This article was published yesterday about the same time that Obama was in the Rose Garden making the situation worse:
Fewer than 3 in 10 American teenagers now hold jobs such as running cash registers, mowing lawns or busing restaurant tables from June to August. The decline has been particularly sharp since 2000, with employment for 16-to-19-year olds falling to the lowest level since World War II. …
The drop in teen employment, steeper than for other age groups, is partly a cultural shift. More youths are spending summer months in school, at music or learning camps or in other activities geared for college. But the decline is especially troubling for teens for whom college may be out of reach, leaving them increasingly idle and with few options to earn wages and job experience.Older workers, immigrants and debt-laden college graduates are taking away lower-skill work as they struggle to find their own jobs in the weak economy. Upper-income white teens are three times as likely to have summer jobs as poor black teens, sometimes capitalizing on their parents’ social networks for help.
Overall, more than 44 percent of teens who want summer jobs don’t get them or work fewer hours than they prefer.
Holy Cow!! Three passages worth repeating:
[T]he decline is especially troubling for teens for whom college may be out of reach,
leaving them increasingly idle and with few options to earn wages and job experience.
Just who are these kids who are now left with few options? My guess is urban city kids. In the country there’s always work on the farm. But in the city & suburbs we have thousands and thousands of idle kids. Hanging around with noth’n to do; just look’n for trouble.
Older workers, immigrants and debt-laden college graduates are taking away
lower-skill work as they struggle to find their own jobs in the weak economy.
Isn’t this the truth. Have you ever been to a Wal-Mart where the greeter was under 50? And now everywhere you go, every single stinking fast food place, sit-down restaurant, Target, Wal-Mart, grocery store, and nearly everywhere else has adult immigrants working there. In the ’70s and ’80s these jobs were good (great) jobs for kids to get. Two people I know very well worked at Jewel when they were in high school. One put herself through college; the other bought a Camaro.
With the new (unconstitutional) Obama plan on immigration the job market will now have another few million young people who are eligible to work … but will struggle to find decent employment. It serves no one when you just set people up to fail.
Upper-income white teens are three times as likely to have summer jobs as poor black teens….
This is what I wrote yesterday; inner city kids are going to be one of the biggest losers in the immigration debacle. Contrary to what some people believe, one cannot just walk into a job that pays $100,000 per year. Everyone has to start somewhere. Usually that means that kids bus tables at a local restaurant, caddie, work retail, mow lawns, wash cars, whatever. These jobs are important because they teach critical lessons necessary to move up in the world: show-up on time, look nice, smile, how to deal with conflict, how to deal with a boss, etc. You can’t just wake-up one day and think you’re going to get a job as a banker without having decent people skills.
Obama is dooming generations of inner city kids to lives of and on government sustenance. These kids will never reach their full potential because they have so many factors stacked against them: poor educational systems, uneducated parents, no access to jobs, and a president who’s bargained their futures for political gain.
June 15, 2012 § Leave a Comment
Yesterday, a/k/a Thursday:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency charged with guarding the U.S. borders, has written a secret draft policy that would let its agents catch and release low-priority illegal immigrants rather than bring them in for processing and prosecution.
The policy, which has not been signed off on, would be the latest move by the Obama administration to set new priorities for the nation’s immigration services, and would bring CBP in line with other Homeland Security Department agencies that already use such “prosecutorial discretion.”
via Washington Times.
Today, a/k/a Friday:
For years the administration had said it didn’t have the authority to make such a move, saying it couldn’t decide to stop deporting wide categories of people on its own without approval from Congress.
But on Friday President Obama says administration now interprets the law to give it the discretion.
“Effective immediately, the Department of Homeland Security is taking steps to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people,” Mr. Obama said in an appearance in the White House Rose Garden. “Over the next few months, eligible individuals who do not present a risk to national security or public safety will be able to request temporary relief from deportation proceedings and apply for work authorization.”
via Washington Times.
Looks to me like the Washington Times was doing some journalism — printing something that someone did not want printed — and may have forced the issue. Obama may have wanted to hold this under his hat for a few more days, weeks, or months. Although slipping in the polls (and needed the Latino vote) a Friday afternoon may not be the best time to announce this program. He’s going to get torn apart on the Sunday morning shows.
How do we know this is going to backfire? Because even the MSM can’t help but call it what it is; from the AP:
The Obama administration will stop deporting and begin granting work permits to younger illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives. The election-year initiative addresses a top priority of an influential Latino electorate that has been vocal in its opposition to administration deportation policies.
via Deseret News.
It’s simple pandering. Obama will let your families stay in the country as long as you get him reelected.
The biggest losers here are of course those who are those who happen to be poor, uneducated. It’s not a stretch to say that most Latino illegal immigrants are not college educated; but they are willing to work. The jobs they take come directly at the expense of American citizens who should get priority over someone who’s not even supposed to be here.
Further, the financial impact of hiring Latinos — who send massive amounts of money home — instead of American citizens — who would spend nearly all the money here in the U.S. — is staggering.
Lastly, we live in a country with three branches of government. One cannot overstep the other. This action today is most likely illegal and will end up being settled by the courts well after the election. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, knows this. But he doesn’t care.
This is all about his winning in November.
June 14, 2012 § 2 Comments
On the evening of Tuesday, June 30, 2009—just five months into his administration—Barack Obama invited a small group of presidential historians to dine with him in the Family Quarters of the White House. His chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, personally delivered the invitations with a word of caution: the meeting was to remain private and off the record. As a result, the media missed the chance to report on an important event, for the evening with the historians provided a remarkable sneak preview of why the Obama presidency would shortly go off the rails. …
Over the two-hour dinner, Mr. Obama and the historians discussed several past presidents. It wasn’t clear from Mr. Obama’s responses which of those presidents he identified with. At one point, he seemed to channel the charismatic John F. Kennedy. At another moment, he extolled the virtues of the “transformative” Ronald Reagan. Then again, it was the saintly Lincoln…or the New Deal’s “Happy Warrior,” Franklin Roosevelt….
Mr. Obama told the historians that he had come up with a slogan for his administration. “I’m thinking of calling it ‘A New Foundation,’ ” he said.
Doris Kearns Goodwin suggested that “A New Foundation” might not be the wisest choice for a motto.
“Why not?” the president asked.
“It sounds,” said Goodwin, “like a woman’s girdle.”
via Fox News.
Absolutely amazing the collusion between these “historians” and a sitting President. How can they claim to be objective when they participate in such pandering? Why doesn’t the media point out the obvious problem with these sorts of meetings? …
That last one I can answer.
Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed:
everything else is public relations.
― George Orwell
There continues to this unholy relationship between the media and Obama specifically and politicians generally. The media wants, no needs, access to the pols and the pols need access to the media. It’s a symbiotic relationship where each benefits the other.
The New York Times was just last week busted printing stories whereby national secrets where “leaked” from the White House. What we have is a major news organization dishing out exactly that the White House wanted printed. That’s not journalism; that’s public relations.
Thankfully the internet is killing the mainstream media faster than the plague raced across Europe. At least with citizen journalists the bias is out in the open. People can make up their own minds considering the source.
March 13, 2012 § 3 Comments
When British Prime Minister David Cameron visits President Barack Obama this week, one detail may stay bottled up: the labels on the wines the White House pours at the state dinner tomorrow night.
For Obama’s first three state dinners, honoring the leaders of India, Mexico and China, the White House released the name, year and appellation of wines — all-American — paired with each course.
Part of a tradition observed by previous presidents, including George W. Bush, that disclosure stopped after Obama’s dinner last year for Chinese President Hu Jintao. One of the wines served on Jan. 19, 2011, was a top-rated 2005 Cabernet Sauvignon from Washington state that originally sold for $115 a bottle and went for as much as $399 by the time of the dinner. The price the White House paid per bottle was not made public.
At the next state dinner, on June 7, 2011, for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the menu made public by the White House didn’t include details on the wines.
It’s national sunshine day, or week, or something. In order to celebrate the White House decided that it was releasing too much information, a/k/a not sending the right kind of message in these tough economic times, when it came to the wine list.